Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email email@example.com
Subject: Re: smtpd or no smtpd??
From: Bennett Todd (betrahul.net)
Date: Wed Jun 28 2000 - 13:02:59 CDT
- Next message: Iain Smith: "(no subject)"
- Previous message: Cristian Deacu: "Re: mailbox_rewrite"
- In reply to: Thomas Roessler: "Re: smtpd or no smtpd??"
- Reply: Bennett Todd: "Re: smtpd or no smtpd??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
2000-06-27-03:58:28 Thomas Roessler:
> On 2000-06-27 08:48:02 +0200, Thomas Andres wrote:
> > But when I send a mail with pine I get the following log entries:
> > As you can see the master process is freshly started.
> > And the I see smtpd in there. Does anybody have an idea
> > why?
> Look at the sendmail(1) manual page. The -bs option,
> which is most likely used by pine, "is implemented by
> running the smtpd(8) daemon".
I betcha that's the root of the problem we're having with pine, too!
Seems that pine can't talk SMTP with Postfix, where it worked fine
with sendmail. I don't use it myself, which makes this a little
harder to track down, but some of my users do insist on pine, and
intermittently have hangs sending messages.
I'm betting here that if they switched from the default, which I
think is exactly what you've described, to using
smtp_server=localhost and talking to a real live smtpd over a
network port, perhaps the problem would go away. I could see a
problem trying to carry on a network dialog over a pipe, that
wouldn't exist over a real network connection.
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored