ana.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
See below:
Ken Murchison wrote:
>
> Gary Mills wrote:
> >
> > Eurika! I finally got a vacation response. Here's the problem:
> > My sieve script looked like this...
> >
> > require ["fileinto","vacation"];
>
> Issues that come to mind:
>
> - do we compare the entire addresses case-independently or just the
> domain?
I think a permissive case-insensitive match on the local part is better when
checking whether a vacation message should be sent. In our environment at
least, where the mail system happens
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Kenneth Murchison writes:
> >
> >I think you're right, but before I make any changes, I want to make sure
> >that I don't break anything else.
>
> Yes, I'm just about to change a few strcmp() to strcasecmp() in
> my copy of sieve/script.c and test it.
>
> >Issues
Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
>
> I thought we already did this correctly, so I'm surprised we ran into
> this.
I ran some tests myself with vacation, and it IS case-dependent w.r.t
domain. Take a look at look_for_me() and the VACATION case in eval()
(in script.c).
> The host part is always cas
Kenneth Murchison writes:
>
>I think you're right, but before I make any changes, I want to make sure
>that I don't break anything else.
Yes, I'm just about to change a few strcmp() to strcasecmp() in
my copy of sieve/script.c and test it.
>Issues that come to mind:
>
>- do we compare the entire
I thought we already did this correctly, so I'm surprised we ran into
this.
The host part is always case-insensitive. The local part is case
sensitive in cyrus (thus all the griping about leg+Foo not working)
and needs to be compared in a case-sensitive fashion.
(The local part isn't always case
Gary Mills wrote:
>
> Eurika! I finally got a vacation response. Here's the problem:
> My sieve script looked like this...
>
> require ["fileinto","vacation"];
>
> vacation :days 4 :addresses ["[EMAIL PROTECTED]",
>"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"] "Testing vacation for the next week";
>
> My test
Kenneth Murchison writes:
>
> This
>couldn't have been causing your problem, just made it harder to find,
>right?
Right.
>BTW, what notification mechanism are you using to see these messages,
>Zephyr?
Yes, zephyr, but it's not working yet, so I'm not seeing any
notifications.
--
-Gary
Gary Mills wrote:
>
> Well, I found a bug in sieve/script.c that seems related to my
> problem. The patch below fixes it. The bug is that the snprintf()
> will never be executed. When I tested the new lmtpd, I expected
> to see either "Sent vacation reply\n" or "Vacation reply suppressed\n",
Eurika! I finally got a vacation response. Here's the problem:
My sieve script looked like this...
require ["fileinto","vacation"];
vacation :days 4 :addresses ["[EMAIL PROTECTED]",
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"] "Testing vacation for the next week";
My test messages were sent to ``[EMAIL PROTECTE
Well, I found a bug in sieve/script.c that seems related to my
problem. The patch below fixes it. The bug is that the snprintf()
will never be executed. When I tested the new lmtpd, I expected
to see either "Sent vacation reply\n" or "Vacation reply suppressed\n",
but neither of those messages
Eric Sorenson wrote:
>
> Do you have a corefile in the deliverdb directory? Run 'gdb -c' over
> it and if so and paste the results of a 'bt' backtrace. I'm betting
> it's either the In-Reply-To header or the EX_USAGE error from sendmail
> due to the commandline being wrong.
Here's a patch to
Eric Sorenson writes:
>
>Note that lmtpd won't send a response back if the mail looks like it
>came from a bounce/root/daemon address, or if the From matches any
>of the To :addresses
I asked somebody else to send mail to my test account today, and
they didn't get a response. This was just in c
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Gary Mills and Ken Murchison corresponded thusly:
> >> Nov 14 14:33:46 setup16 master[9266]: [ID 970914 local6.debug] process
> >> 9900 exited, signaled to death by 11
> >
> >Hmmm. This *might* be caused by cyrus and sasl being linked against two
> >different versions of Ber
Gary Mills wrote:
>
> This looks like a false lead. It fixed deliver, but deliver is not
> used for responses from lmtpd. I do get responses from redirects and
> rejects, but not from vacation.
OK. The only differences between redirect/reject and vacation are that
vacation tries to verify t
Kenneth Murchison writes:
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> I found a typo in /etc/imapd.conf:
>>
>> < lmtpsocket: /var/run/imap/ltmp
>> ---
>> > lmtpsocket: /var/run/imap/lmtp
>>
>> I also got an empty mail message. I didn't realize that deliver was
>> used, since my sendm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Kenneth Murchison writes:
> >
> >OK, let's try this and see what happens (grasping at straws):
>
> >$ su cyrus
> >$ /usr/cyrus/bin/deliver -l
>
> Thanks. I believe we've got it. It said:
>
> connect failed: No such file or directory
> 421 4.3.0
Kenneth Murchison writes:
>
>OK, let's try this and see what happens (grasping at straws):
>$ su cyrus
>$ /usr/cyrus/bin/deliver -l
Thanks. I believe we've got it. It said:
connect failed: No such file or directory
421 4.3.0 deliver: connect failed
I found a typo in /etc/imap
Gary Mills wrote:
>
> Kenneth Murchison writes:
> >
> >Let's try to split the problem in half. Compile the 'test' program in
> >the sieve directory. Then grab one of the messages that you think it
> >should have responded to and your sieve script. Run the 'test' program
> >using the message
Gary Mills wrote:
>
> Kenneth Murchison writes:
> >
> >Let's try to split the problem in half. Compile the 'test' program in
> >the sieve directory. Then grab one of the messages that you think it
> >should have responded to and your sieve script. Run the 'test' program
> >using the message
Kenneth Murchison writes:
>
>Let's try to split the problem in half. Compile the 'test' program in
>the sieve directory. Then grab one of the messages that you think it
>should have responded to and your sieve script. Run the 'test' program
>using the message and script (it'll ask you for the e
Gary Mills wrote:
>
> Kenneth Murchison writes:
> >
> >Did you ever get a vacation response with your current script? If so,
> >you won't get another until you change the text of the response. If
> >not, take a look at /var/log/imap.log for sieve/lmtpd errors.
>
> No, it's never responded.
Kenneth Murchison writes:
>
>Did you ever get a vacation response with your current script? If so,
>you won't get another until you change the text of the response. If
>not, take a look at /var/log/imap.log for sieve/lmtpd errors.
No, it's never responded. Where does it keep the information on
Gary Mills wrote:
>
> Kenneth Murchison writes:
> >
> >In your case, it looks like websieve guessed at your address, and got it
> >wrong.
>
> Thanks for the response. That was my correct address on the test server.
> It should have matched the recipient address on the test message,
> unless s
Gary Mills wrote:
>
> I'm using cyrus-imapd-2.0.7 with sendmail-8.11.1 delivering via LMTP.
> The following sieve script created by Websieve version 0.48 works
> correctly:
>
> require ["fileinto"];
>
> if allof (address :matches ["from"] "***") {
> redirect "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
> }
>
>
Kenneth Murchison writes:
>
>In your case, it looks like websieve guessed at your address, and got it
>wrong.
Thanks for the response. That was my correct address on the test server.
It should have matched the recipient address on the test message,
unless sendmail is doing something strange. He
I'm using cyrus-imapd-2.0.7 with sendmail-8.11.1 delivering via LMTP.
The following sieve script created by Websieve version 0.48 works
correctly:
require ["fileinto"];
if allof (address :matches ["from"] "***") {
redirect "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
}
else {
keep;
}
However, when I use Web
27 matches
Mail list logo
