On Mon March 2 2009 13:07:18 Victor Duchovni wrote: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 12:56:33PM -0600, /dev/rob0 wrote: > > Massive confusion, and looking back on the thread somewhat, I still > > think we're lacking a good description of the problem. > > > > On Mon March 2 2009 06:31:09 Leonardo Coelho wrote: > > > I'm sorry but i don't get it, if i have this two lines: > > > > local_transport = virtual > > > > Don't do this. It probably doesn't work anyway. We have address > > classes with proper *_transport defaults. The local_transport is of > > course local(8), which is designed to work with Unix users and > > traditional Unix system aliases(5). > > There is nothing wrong with "local_transport = virtual", if one wants > virtual delivery with no aliases(5) processing or .forward processing > for all local users, but often setting mailbox_transport is a better > way to handle "local" (system-user) mail.
Thanks. I was thinking, as well, that the someone with such a need might do better using relay_domains and set "relay_transport = dovecot", for the domains defined in his virtual_mailbox_domains, since later on the OP also changed virtual_transport. Then the mydestination domains could be moved to virtual_mailbox_domains and mydestination unset. This fits in with the principle of doing the least possible pounding of square pegs into round holes. Of course this is all academic; I doubt the OP really knows what he needs. -- Offlist mail to this address is discarded unless "/dev/rob0" or "not-spam" is in Subject: header