At 02:25 PM 1/2/04 -0600, you wrote:
>In our Sendmail instructions (the only MTA requiring the use of
>procmail), we explicitly set procmail's EXITCODE variable from
>tmda-filter's exit code so that procmail *will* successfully return
>the temporary failure notice to Sendmail.  If that is not done, all
>bets are off, but this really can't be considered a TMDA problem, as
>TMDA does does behave correctly.  Procmail, on the other hand, happily
>ignores delivery problems and must be coerced into doing the right
>thing.

I assume it's the following code in the default .procmailrc that assigns the exitcode 
and establishes the default action:
# Take the exit code from TMDA.
EXITCODE=$?

# TMDA takes care of final delivery
DEFAULT=/dev/null

Must something be done with the .procmailrc file beyond the default configuration to 
insure it does the right thing?

>> The real problem is a lack of attention to detail... I failed to
>> create a file, or I created it as root and didn't have proper
>> permissions.
>
>Are you saying that TMDA's inability to access a file that you
>explicity created with permissions that deny it access is TMDA's lack
>of attention to detail, or your's?  (Email sucks as a communication
>medium.  My question is serious, not sarcastic.  I can't tell from
>your sentence which you mean and I need to know before attempting any
>sort of reasonable answer.)

My use of "I" implied "MY" lack of attention to detail... not TMDA's... ;-)

>That mailman creates files with permissions that deny regular users
>access is obviously not TMDA's fault, but perhaps there are some
>Mailman admins who have run into this problem and figured out how to
>solve it, or at least a reasonable workaround?

I didn't imply it was TMDA's fault, merely it appears that because of this denial of 
access to a file, TMDA "loses" the message.  I would regard that as a deficiency in 
TMDA... if that is indeed happening.  It certainly *appears* to be.

>> Is there a way to make this more friendly for admin error?  Is there
>> a way to prevent the loss of the message when a similar Python error
>> occurs?
>
>Messages shouldn't be lost and aren't, with the correct MTA/delivery
>agent configuration.  This is perhaps the most important design
>criteria both Jason and I adhere to with TMDA.  Regardless of how nice
>a feature would be or how difficult it would be to implement
>correctly, mail must not be lost!

That is a great design criteria.  Essentially, I have a default sendmail/procmail 
configuration... procmail is only being told what to do by the TMDA recommended 
instructions, and it appears that when there is an error, messages are lost.  I will 
test for this explicitly and let you know what I find.

Thanks,

Steve


_____________________________________________
tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users

Reply via email to