From: Wietse Venema (no email)
Date: Mon Apr 01 2002 - 14:06:01 EST
Clifton Royston:
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 11:26:38AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Crystone AB / Daniel S?rl?v:
> > > Thank you all for your help, solved the problem one hour
> > > ago (it was a # which trashed config!)
> >
> > Newer Postfix versions log a warning and refuse the mail with as
> > reason a server configuration error. That is, they err on the safe
> > side.
> >
> > Older versions logged a warning which of course no-one noticed
> > but let the mail pass.
>
> Wietse,
>
> I have one new user's comment on error checking:
>
> I know you mentioned that it was a design decision to not check for
> the existence of referenced files when doing a "postfix check", and to
> leave that until the specific daemon processes need to start accessing
> the files.
How would `postfix check' know what files another process opens?
How would `postfix check' know if that other process runs chrooted?
How would `postfix check' know if that process has suitable privileges
to open the file?
No, this simply does not work.
> However, over the course of the past weekend, as I started setting up
> more realistic UCE tests, etc. on our test mail server, I've observed
> that 80-90% of my mistakes fell into the category of "missing files."
> That included typos in the file names, mistyped path names, forgetting
> to run "postmap" to make a .db file, naming a file one thing in the
> config and something different when I created it, and just about every
> other boneheaded error possible.
That's what error messages are for. You look in the log and correct
the error.
Wietse
-
To unsubscribe, send mail to with content
(not subject): unsubscribe postfix-users
|
|
|