4.26- beta upgrade (was RE: Another MailScanner User!)

[Neil Robst]

Drew,

Can you explain a bit more about how you've configured postfix, please?
I'm using the suggested setup of two postfix instances - the first runs
everything in a chroot jail and smtp, local and virtual and deferred.
Mailscanner then picks everything out the deferred queue, does it's
stuff and drops it back into the incoming queue of the second postfix
instance. Seems to be working well, but you said you'd changed postfix
to bypass the duplicate problems...

Regards,
Neil

On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 09:06, Drew Marshall wrote:
> I've been running it now since the weekend without problem. I would
> suggest that although marked as a beta and potentialy unstable, it's about
> as unstable as the production releases :-) The new patches seem to be
> working well.
>
> I have to admit, I changed my Postfix set up to by pass the duplicate
> problems and haven't changed it back. I now use a rule in Postfix to hold
> all incoming mail, let MS collect from the hold queue (The queue runner
> doesn't ever run in there) and drop back into the incoming queue for
> delivery. It just means that I only have to ever run just one Postfix
> instance. I only ever use SMTP connection so don't have to worry about
> direct queue injection by passing MailScanner.
>
> Drew
>
> Neil Robst said:
> > Yes... fingers crossed!
> >
> > Any other issues known with the 4.26-4 beta currently? What's the
> > general feeling in the community of it's stability, etc?
> >
> > On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 22:07, Drew Marshall wrote:
> >> Just for my 2p, my server doesn't have a high load but I suffered
> >> duplicate mail. My old set up on Slackware didn't suffer, the new on
> >> Gentoo did :-(  . I'm not quite sure why but it seemed that the Postfix
> >> queue runner and MailScanner got in each others way with the result that
> >> MS picked up incomplete messages.
> >>
> >> <fingers crossed> Any way that's all in the past now </fingers crossed>
> >>
> >> Drew
> >>
> >> Neil Robst wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hi all,
> >> >
> >> >Just applied the 4.26-4 beta of MailScanner to my mail server, though
> >> I've
> >> >been unable to replicate the problem with the duplicate mails either
> >> before
> >> >or after (as expected) the upgrade. Do you know any details about
> >> >that -whether it only manifested itself when there were lots of
> >> recepients
> >> >on the message or a high load on the server or what?
> >> >
> >> >Regards,
> >> >Neil
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >This message has been scanned for viruses and
> >> >dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> >> >believed to be clean.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> In line with our policy, this message has
> >> been scanned for viruses and dangerous
> >> content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
> >> www.themarshalls.co.uk/policy
> >
>
>
> --
> In line with our policy, this message has
> been scanned for viruses and dangerous
> content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
> www.themarshalls.co.uk/policy