On 7 Oct 2006, at 10:37, Andreas Metzler wrote:
Quote http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_POLICY_README.html#protocol
| The "instance" attribute value can be used to correlate different
| requests regarding the same message delivery.
and an example value is "instance=123.456.7".
I read that, insuffi
On 2006-10-04 Yuri D'Elia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> I assume you, like me, were using postgrey with exim and blindly
> followed the instructions contained in the README.
[...]
Hello,
ccing upstream's mailing list.
I based my setup on http://blog.mombe.org/systems/greylistexim.htm but
On 5 Oct 2006, at 09:02, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
Since I'm quite busy currently, and since I don't use exim: could
you just
re-send this description as a patch against README.exim, so I can just
apply it and do an upload? Probably not before mon or tue at least,
though.
Attached. However
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 23:41, Yuri D'Elia wrote:
> On 4 Oct 2006, at 19:47, Andreas Metzler wrote:
...
> This is the minimal required exim expansion:
>
>set acl_m0 = request=smtpd_access_policy\n\
> client_address=$sender_host_address\n\
> client_name=
On 4 Oct 2006, at 19:47, Andreas Metzler wrote:
Thanks, the patch seems to have worked for me, I have been running it
since the 29th of September.
Unfortunately the patch is wrong, I should have been more cautious
(not that it breaks postgrey however).
After looking deeper into the problem
On 2006-09-29 Yuri D'Elia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Package: postgrey
[...]
> is_new_instance is missing a parameter. See the attached patch.
> Hardly unnoticieable, it's spewing warnings all around.
[...]
Thanks, the patch seems to have worked for me, I have been running it
since the 29th of S
Package: postgrey
Version: 1.27-3
Followup-For: Bug #380257
is_new_instance is missing a parameter. See the attached patch.
Hardly unnoticieable, it's spewing warnings all around.
--- /usr/sbin/postgrey 2006-09-23 12:56:24.0 +0200
+++ postgrey2006-09-29 16:41:31.0 +0200
@@ -36
7 matches
Mail list logo
