MailScanner users using latest Postfix

Glenn Steen glenn.steen at
Wed Nov 8 16:30:40 GMT 2006

On 08/11/06, Drew Marshall <drew at> wrote:
> On Wed, November 8, 2006 14:42, Glenn Steen wrote:
> >
> > Usually I'd agree, but (clued in from another thread by Jason) this
> > time it is because he set the (MailScanner) Incoming Work Dir to be
> > the hold queue... So those errors are due to MailScanner writing one
> > directory/child (childs PID as name) into the hold queue, nothing more
> > "sinister" than that:-).
> Ahh yes, just read that one. Agreed.
> >
> > Then again, with the speed and ... precision... Jason had while
> > setting this up, the usual problems with bayes, razor etc isn't
> > unlikely, I'll readily agree to that:-).
> But I suspect in Jason's instance that is some where further down the work
> stack. It works, time for bed, fix fine details later :-)

Likely true, yes:).

> Now I wonder how many of us have have done that? ;-)
Are you suggesting that any of us would be in any way fallible?
Naaah.... Or wait....:-D
(I wonder what it's going to take to completely erase the memory of me
fat-fingering the Non Spam Actions (when I rewrote it for the header
"X-Spam..." thingy) so that I delivered quite a few messages directly
into the bitbucket... Jules "idiot-proofed" it after that... I still
blush, just thinking of it)

Or just making do with "working" instead of "working extremely
well"... Daily happening... Sigh.
-- Glenn
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se

More information about the MailScanner mailing list