On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:10:32PM +0000, Thomas Arnett wrote:
> Jeroen Geilman <jeroen <at> adaptr.nl> writes:
> > I completely agree that non-delivery to a (presumably dependable) MDA
> > should never error out, but I thought a soft solution would be better
> > than choosing the more extreme route (of altering working code).
>
> I believe the code is not working as intended and documented. Please let me
> know
> if I have missed something.
I don't think you have missed anything. The folks suggesting soft_bounce
as a "solution" are not looking at the big picture.
Wietse, if I understand correctly, wants to ensure that the issue is
clearly defined, so we don't solve the wrong one, and is worth fixing.
Not all minor bugs are worth fixing, the benefit may not outweigh the
risk of unforseen consequences or implementation errors in the fix.
Why does your Dovecot intermittently SIGBUS? Surely that's the real
problem that needs fixing. (Yes, I would probably still change Postfix
to treat killed processes as a transient condition, but I am a bit less
conservative than Wietse).
--
Viktor.
