sendmail 8.12.7 squawking after MS 4.11-1 upgrade

[John Hawkes-Reed]

Julian Field wrote:
> At 17:03 23/01/2003, I wrote:

>> I think I'd call randomly deleting body text 'nasty'.
>
> This is the first time (in this thread) that you have mentioned that it is
> definitely deleting body text. No-one else appears to have said (in this
> thread) that it is deleting body text either.

(Un)lucky coincidence - I installed 4.11 today and was getting the
following in the log:

Jan 23 16:47:22 hplb Mailscanner: Virus and Content Scanning: Starting
Jan 23 16:47:22 hplb Mailscanner: New Batch: Found 2 messages waiting
Jan 23 16:47:22 hplb Mailscanner: New Batch: Scanning 1 messages, 4428 bytes
Jan 23 16:47:22 hplb sendmail[27333]: SYSERR(root): File descriptors
missing on startup: stdout, stderr: Bad file number
Jan 23 16:47:22 hplb sendmail[27333]: NOQUEUE:   0: fl=0x0, mode=20666:
CHR: dev=64/65539, ino=1680, nlink=1, u/gid=2/2, size=0
Jan 23 16:47:22 hplb sendmail[27333]: NOQUEUE:   1: fl=0x1, mode=20666:
CHR: dev=64/65539, ino=1680, nlink=1, u/gid=2/2, size=0
Jan 23 16:47:22 hplb sendmail[27333]: NOQUEUE:   2: fl=0x1, mode=20666:
CHR: dev=64/65539, ino=1680, nlink=1, u/gid=2/2, size=0
Jan 23 16:47:22 hplb sendmail[27333]: NOQUEUE:   3: fl=0x10001,
mode=10666: FIFO: dev=64/65539, ino=1983, nlink=1, u/gid=0/0, size=2048

... So I had a poke through the list-archive and found this thread.

The rest of the log appeared to say that messages were being delivered
rather than dropped on the floor, so I didn't revert immediately.

> Exactly what do you think is going on? Can you produce some evidence that
> it is deleting body text?

[ Message excerpt follows ]

Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 16:45:18 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean

Error initialising detection engine - missing main virus data

ublin,
Edinburgh, Lisbon, London.

[ Rest of meeting request elided ]

I'll take a stab in the dark and guess that the one line is from Sophos.
It may well be that this is only going to happen when the AV code
attempts to report an internal error. (which should have gone to stderr?)