On Tue, Jan 18, 2005, Ewald Geschwinde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > I tested something with my dbmail. > > I have now deleted teh user [EMAIL PROTECTED] > and only the aliases to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] exists like that > > 17 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | > 0 > 20 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 15 | 0 > > when I'm sending now a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > he does not fin aliases > > Is it not true when theuser is not found then he checks the aliases > table whether an alias for this user exists?
This behavior changed from DBMail 1.2 to 2.0, we are now working on making it properly backwards compatible with DBMail 1.2. What you are seeing here is correct in DBMail 1.2: you *must* have an alias for every address that you receive. DBMail 2.0 adds a check of the users table, making it easier for sites with username-are-full-addresses, but that was accidentally mutually exclusive with the alias lookups, and hence the bug you can see in DBMail 2.0. Aaron
