Bug#387536: /etc/logcheck/violations.ignore.d/postgrey needs a new update

2006-09-15 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Adrian von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.09.15.0912 +0200]: > Why? postgrey's logcheck file are shipped with postgrey, so supporting the > old version in the new package doesn't make sense to me. People who have > modified the log message have had to modify their logcheck files a

Bug#387536: /etc/logcheck/violations.ignore.d/postgrey needs a new update

2006-09-15 Thread Adrian von Bidder
On Thursday 14 September 2006 23:00, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Enrico Zini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.09.14.2231 +0200]: > > That is, no parenthesis around "see URL", and a comma after > > "Greylisted". > > Adrian, please make sure to support both. Why? postgrey's logcheck file are ship

Bug#387536: /etc/logcheck/violations.ignore.d/postgrey needs a new update

2006-09-14 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Enrico Zini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.09.14.2231 +0200]: > That is, no parenthesis around "see URL", and a comma after "Greylisted". Adrian, please make sure to support both. -- .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer, author, administrator,

Bug#387536: /etc/logcheck/violations.ignore.d/postgrey needs a new update

2006-09-14 Thread Enrico Zini
Package: postgrey Version: 1.27-1 Severity: normal Hello, the rule in the file is: ^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ postfix/smtpd\[[0-9]+\]: (NOQUEUE|[0-9A-F]{7,8}): reject: RCPT from .+\[[0-9.]{7,15}\]: 450 <.+>: Recipient address rejected: Greylisted \(see http://isg\.ee\.ethz\.ch/tools