Hi - I'm new to the list but I have searched ;-)
We are running Spamdyke 4.0.10 (as included in Qmail Toaster Plus)
with idle-timeout-secs set to 60. One of my users recently got 30
duplicate messages (and wasn't happy). Looking at the logs, I see that
Spamdyke indeed timed out but the messages we
* Hans F. Nordhaug [2010-01-22]:
> Hi - I'm new to the list but I have searched ;-)
>
> We are running Spamdyke 4.0.10 (as included in Qmail Toaster Plus)
> with idle-timeout-secs set to 60. One of my users recently got 30
> duplicate messages (and wasn't happy). Lookin
Hi!
Today I decied to run a config test of my spamdyke. Don't know why -
it seems to have been running quite nicely on it's own. Anyway:
[r...@post ~]# /usr/local/bin/spamdyke --log-level=debug \
--run-as-user vpopmail --
ou wish.
OK. Just a thought: Is this something that could be added to the prune
script that was posted on the list some days ago?
Regards,
Hans
> On 2/12/10 7:32 AM, Hans F. Nordhaug wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Today I decied to run a config test of my spamdyke. Don&
* Eric Shubert [2010-02-14]:
> Hans F. Nordhaug wrote:
> > * Sam Clippinger [2010-02-13]:
> >> The incorrect directories are not a problem, they're just out of place.
> >> No legitimate deliveries will match those paths, so they won't get in
> >>
* Hans F. Nordhaug [2010-02-14]:
> * Sam Clippinger [2010-02-13]:
> > Messages with an empty sender address are legal -- they are typically
> > used for bounce messages. Because of that, spamdyke will allow them.
> >
> > However, messages with empty usernames (e
Hi!
Today we turned of Spamdyke to see if it makes our e-mail server more
stable. The server is running a plain, up-to-date CentOS 5.3 with
SpamDyke 4.0.10 and Qmail from Qmailtoaster/Qmailtoaster Plus.
What we are seeing is 100+ hanging Spamdyke processing and
corresponding defunct qmail-smtpd c
gt;
> I had the same problem in the past and ended up that my real problem was the
> dns-resolver.
> With a working dnscache all my problems with where gone.
> Jm2c
>
> Andreas
>
> Am Thursday 25 February 2010 11:47:01 schrieb Hans F. Nordhaug:
> > Hi!
> >
>
gt; should fix this if it causes config-test to throw errors. What do you
> think Sam?
>
> Sam Clippinger wrote:
> > Looks like a bug. Unless anyone can think of any reason why a message
> > should be accepted without a recipient username...?
> >
> > -- S
