Can you move this thread elsewhere?
It's EXTREMELY off topic now.
Regards and best wishes,
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> David Ford <david(at)blue-labs(dot)org> writes:
> > >ooooooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.... I've been raggin on
> > >Marc on that one for well over a year, maybe two.. I started using
> > >qmail when it was still in .7something beta and never looked back. The
> > >folks at Security Focus have moved all of the lists to ezmlm (part of
> > >qmail) and have had nothing but success... But don't tell Marc.
> > >
> > And ezlm is -ever- so quick to tell you your mail is bouncing when
> > your link goes down for a few hours or is sporadic. I know of several
> > others that simply send you the emails that are in queue.
> I don't know what you are referring to here. ezmlm simply handles
> bounces generated by the MTA. qmail does not bounce mail merely
> because a link goes down for a few hours or is sporadic.
> There is an issue here which you may be referring to: vanilla ezmlm
> does not handle temporary failure DSN notices very well--it treats
> them as bounces. This is easily fixable, and in fact I believe that
> ezmlm+idx (which is what most people use) does handle them correctly
> by default.
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2001-08-25 16:47:05|
|Previous:||From: Dominic J. Eidson||Date: 2001-08-25 05:16:49|
|Subject: Re: Re: [PATCHES] Patch to include PAM support... |