On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:11, Jerry <dovecot.u...@seibercom.net> wrote: > On Fri, 28 May 2010 11:25:17 -0400 > Phil Howard <ttip...@gmail.com> articulated: > > >> My main.cf file has the comments (my own that explains why settings >> are there, not the default comments). It is the easier to read file. >> Even then, I was also reading the postconf -n output and just didn't >> see the subtle difference (I was thinking more along the lines of >> "what else is needed"). What might be needed to avoid things like >> this is something to compare them. Or maybe postfix giving an error >> when a conflicting setting is encountered (or is there some basis for >> always allowing settings that change previous settings). > > In the Postfix "main.cf" file, the last entry wins. This is one of the > reasons to use "postconf -n" and NOT what you think the correct entry > is. The output of "postconf -n" shows what Postfix sees. > > To sum it up: > > Provide output from the postfinger tool. This can be found at > http://ftp.wl0.org/SOURCES/postfinger. > > If the problem is SASL related, consider including the output from the > saslfinger tool. This can be found at > http://postfix.state-of-mind.de/patrick.koetter/saslfinger/. > > If the problem is about too much mail in the queue, consider including > output from the qshape tool, as described in the QSHAPE_README file. > > If the problem is protocol related (connections time out, or an SMTP > server complains about syntax errors etc.) consider recording a session > with tcpdump, as described in the DEBUG_README document.
Have you seen any config check tools?