Bug#935886: [pkg-bacula-devel] Bug#935886: does not email properly, violating RFC821
On 25.09.19 21:02, Sven Hartge wrote: > On 25.09.19 20:23, Antoine Beaupré wrote: >> And unfortunately, this configuration is shipped in the Debian package, >> in /usr/share/bacula-common/defconfig/bacula-dir.conf > I can't find the code in bacula-common_9.4.2-1~bpo9+1 To confirm this, I did a fresh install of bacula-director/stretch-backports and the bacula-dir.conf is correct. Unless Peter has more input about the origins of his bacula-dir.conf I think this has not been a bug for the last 12 years. Grüße, Sven. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#935886: [pkg-bacula-devel] Bug#935886: does not email properly, violating RFC821
On 25.09.19 20:23, Antoine Beaupré wrote: > The safest thing would be to remove all "(Bacula)" stuff from any mailcommand > out there. I agree with your analysis and will look into this in the next days. Grüße, Sven. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#935886: [pkg-bacula-devel] Bug#935886: does not email properly, violating RFC821
On 25.09.19 20:23, Antoine Beaupré wrote: > And unfortunately, this configuration is shipped in the Debian package, > in /usr/share/bacula-common/defconfig/bacula-dir.conf I can't find the code in bacula-common_9.4.2-1~bpo9+1 The code in the file you mentioned is correct: mailcommand = "/usr/sbin/bsmtp -h localhost -f \"\(Bacula\) \<%r\>\" -s \"Bacula: %t %e of %c %l\" %r" operatorcommand = "/usr/sbin/bsmtp -h localhost -f \"\(Bacula\) \<%r\>\" -s \"Bacula: Intervention needed for %j\" %r" mailcommand = "/usr/sbin/bsmtp -h localhost -f \"\(Bacula\) \<%r\>\" -s \"Bacula daemon message\" %r" And looking at the git history for the source of that file show it was corrected in 2007 via efbc08878 in version 2.2.0. I guess the problem here is a very old configuration which has been kept alive for the last 12 years. Grüße, Sven. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
