Beta test please

[Jeremy Evans]

Thanks for the quick response as always.

Starting now, I'm leaving the Information Header setting blank instead of
commenting it out, so that I won't have a problem with it next time.

I'm not sure if I understand what went wrong with the Archive Mail setting.
It wasn't commented out in the supplied file (though it is commented out in
the default file, as are other settings such as Lock Type and Allowed Sophos
Error Messages).  Maybe you should change the Archive Mail setting to blank
or "no" instead of or in addition to having it commented out (same for the
other settings that are commented out by default).  Would that fix the
problem with Archive Mail?  I'm guessing I didn't have a problem with those
other settings because they were commented out in both the default and the
supplied files.

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Field [mailto:mailscanner at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK]
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 2:36 PM
To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: Beta test please


At 22:19 13/03/2003, you wrote:
>After running the upgrade_MailScanner_conf program I noticed that the
>Archive Mail setting was removed, and the Information Header section was
>added a second time.  Here are the diffs between the new version (created
by
>upgrade_MailScanner_conf) and the old MailScanner.conf:
>
>426a427,434
> > Information Header = X-MailScanner-Information:
> >
> > # Add this extra header to all mail as it is processed.
> > # The contents is set by "Information Header Value" and is intended for
> > # you to be able to insert a help URL for your users.
> > # If you don't want an information header at all, just comment out this
> > # setting or set it to be blank.
> > # This can also be the filename of a ruleset.
>599,612d606
><
>< #
>< # Mail Archiving and Monitoring
>< # -----------------------------
>< #
><
>< # Space-separated list of email address and directory names where you
want
>< # a copy of all mail to be forwarded or stored.
>< #
>< # If you give this option a ruleset, you can control exactly whose mail
>< # is archived or forwarded. If you do this, beware of the legal
>implications
>< # as this could be deemed to be illegal interception unless the police
>have
>< # asked you to do this.
>< Archive Mail = /opt/MailScanner/etc/rules/archive.rules
>
>Here are the relevant parts of the diffs between the new file created by
>upgrade_MailScanner_conf and the 4.14-3 default MailScanner.conf:
>
>427a429,436
> > # Add this extra header to all mail as it is processed.
> > # The contents is set by "Information Header Value" and is intended for
> > # you to be able to insert a help URL for your users.
> > # If you don't want an information header at all, just comment out this
> > # setting or set it to be blank.
> > # This can also be the filename of a ruleset.
> > #Information Header = X-MailScanner-Information:
> >
>600,613d608
>< # Mail Archiving and Monitoring
>< # -----------------------------
>< #
><
>< # Space-separated list of email address and directory names where you
want
>< # a copy of all mail to be forwarded or stored.
>< #
>< # If you give this option a ruleset, you can control exactly whose mail
>< # is archived or forwarded. If you do this, beware of the legal
>implications
>< # as this could be deemed to be illegal interception unless the police
>have
>< # asked you to do this.
>< #Archive Mail = /var/spool/MailScanner/archive
><
>< #
>
>
>Here is the output from upgrade_MailScanner_conf:
>
>Added new: Information Header = X-MailScanner-Information:
>Removed old: Archive Mail = /opt/MailScanner/etc/rules/archive.rules

It is commented out in the supplied .conf file, with the result that the
upgrade script thinks it has been removed as it can't find it. I wanted the
upgrade script to work with any version upgrade, with the result that it
doesn't do 100% of the job for you. It does tell you where to look though,
and hopefully you will be able to fix up the remains by hand.

The only other option was to make it read the syntax structure of the new
conf file from ConfigDefs.pl, which would have made the script enormously
more complicated. And as for working with any version, that would be almost
impossible. So I went for the "works 98% of the time with any upgrade"
version than the "works 100% of the time in exactly the right situation"
version.
--
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support