OK,

So, here are the headers from the reports that get denied:

Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from estzuken.zuken.com (estzuken.us.zuken.com [42.1.9.2]) by zuken.COM 
(8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA20361 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 17 
Oct 2001 01:21:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Amanda Backup User <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-PCBDesignLeader: http://www.zuken.com
Received: (from amanda@localhost) by estzuken.zuken.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id 
f9H50vs07883 for amanda; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 01:00:57 -0400 (EDT)
Date: 17 Oct 2001 01:00:57 -0400
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ZUKEN AMANDA MAIL REPORT FOR October 16, 2001
X-UIDL: ACX"!Fi7"!TD8"!^dQ"!
X-Evolution-Source: pop://klussier@redacaw/inbox
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Evolution: 000000a5-0010

And here are the headers from the errors (like when I forget to change tapes):

Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from estzuken.zuken.com (estzuken.us.zuken.com [::ffff:42.1.9.2]) by postal 
with esmtp; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 14:25:29 -0400
Received: (from amanda@localhost) by estzuken.zuken.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id 
f9MI15A22404 for amanda; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 14:01:05 -0400 (EDT)
Date: 22 Oct 2001 14:01:05 -0400
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ZUKEN AMANDA PROBLEM: FIX BEFORE RUN, IF POSSIBLE

The errors are accepted, but the reports are not. The headers are longer for the 
reports, and I still don't know what the problem is. Both the reports and the errors 
look like plain ASCII text to me.

Quoting Paul Lussier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> 
> Oops, I meant to reply to the list, but I somehow only replied to the
> sender of this particular e-mail, mod in this case.
> 
> Seems to be a case of:           1
>                           ---------------
>                                Derek
> 
> (for those not so mathematically inclined, 1/x is the *inverse* of x)
> 
> (for those completely befuddled by what I'm talking about, see the
>  gnhlug archives from 1999-2000 re: The Famous Derek Reply Problem :)
> 
> 
> ------- Forwarded Message
> 
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Where's the problem? 
> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 21 Oct 2001 10:56:24 EDT."
>              <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 11:54:10 -0400
> From: Paul Lussier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> In a message dated: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 10:56:24 EDT
> Michael O'Donnell said:
> 
> >I'm not really qualified to comment here, so I will...
> [...snip...]
> >That (undoubtedly flawless) logic would seem to leave
> >Amanda as the culprit,
> 
> Except:
> 
>       A.  Amanda does nothing with MIME at all.  All her mail reports
>           are plain ascii text.  The code is actually nothing more than
>           an opened file handle to the system mailer, i.e. sendmail,
>           with a bunch of fprintf statements. (you can look at the code
>           in the $AMANDA_SRC/server-src/reporter.c file
>       B.  Sendmail does nothing with the mail handed to it other than
>           deliver it to the recipients listed in the To: field which 
>           is statically defined in the amanda.conf file (can be an alias).
> 
> Therefore, I suspect that the problem is not sendmail nor amanda, rather
> the courier mail server.
> 
> It is entirely possible that Amanda is munging the mail into some kind
> of MIME format, however, in the 5+ years of playing with amanda, and
> being on the amanda-users and amanda-developers mailing lists, I've
> neither
> seen nor heard of anyone ever complaining about amanda's mail coming
> through
> as 8-bit (or any other kind of) MIME.
> 
> Additionally, a quick perusal of
> 
>       http://www.courier-mta.org/intro.html
> 
> shows that courier supports:
> 
>       * DSN, PIPELINING, and 8BITMIME ESMTP extension. Courier
>         automatically converts 8-bit messages to 7-bit encoding, for
>         relaying mail to external mail gateways.
> 
> And:
> 
>       Courier will rewrite headers and MIME-ify messages whenever
>       appropriate. Header rewriting logic is hardcoded in C, there
>       is no header rewriting language as in sendmail. An interpreted
>       language imposes a drastic speed penalty. The rewriting
>       library is fairly simple, and the the standard rewriting rules
>       will do for most situations.
> 
> This information alone pretty much indicates to me that courier is
> the culprit, since they admit they auto-MIMEify messages.  Sounds more
> like it's auto-HOSEifying them instead.
> 
> ------- End of Forwarded Message
> 
> 
> Seeya,
> Paul
> 
> **********************************************************
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
> *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
> unsubscribe gnhlug
> **********************************************************
> 



---------------------------------------------------------
"There's nothing you shouldn't speak of if you've got 
 something to say, and there's no one to be scared of, 
 just get them out of your way."  -- The Alarm

**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************

Reply via email to