apply the patch, we need to know that. Of course, from the original report, it's very likely that it's another line which would be what you intended in your patch, because of the "big" difference in the two reporting dates (33 secs), but I don't know that for sure.
Forget that statement, it's not very likely because the original reporter says:
You are absolutely right, the reject_warning log line is always written together with the reject log line.
So it's possible that it should just be ignored. Willi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
