hold folder not getting processed
glenn.steen at gmail.com
Sun Dec 23 10:43:11 GMT 2007
On 23/12/2007, Hugo van der Kooij <hvdkooij at vanderkooij.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> Guy Story wrote:
> > I tried the hash suggestion in the wiki and that did not fix the
> > problem. I am using Ubuntu and would have thought that this would not
> > have been an issue. I found a Debian package that is 4.55. I want to
> > copy of the VM I have my mail server running in first then install the
> > Debian package. If that breaks anything, I can just copy over the
> > backup vm and press it back into service while I look for the answer.
> > Monday is when I will try to take this on. I do not want to fall in a
> > trap with dependencies by using the source package. I can use a copy of
> > the VM to test that out and see what happens from there as well.
> I suggest you build your deb file or notify the package maintainer. But
> I feel you have proven Jules point about external maintenance of
> MailScanner packages.
> Please read the Changelog (http://www.mailscanner.info/ChangeLog) and
> see that 4.60.8-1 is your minimal required version.
> If you run a packaged version the packager should keep up or write up a
> fixed set of versions.
> I suggest you file a bug at the Unbuntu repository. The maintainer
> should not allow postfix > 2.2 if MailScanner < 4.60.8
Quite true, Hugo.
I personally find the lag in the .deb packaging very strange... Since
someone has made the effort to package the latest postfix, they should
be willing to do the same for MS... Oh well, "niche product" comes to
If I had the time, I would do it myself, just to give an easy
alternative... But since I don't really use any Debian derivatives in
production systems ... it's likely not going to happen. Not from me at
The only viable option, if one wants to use the latest PF and the
milter support it provides, is to use the source tarball and the
debian-ized init script that Jules provides separately. We've had
reports that this cures any problems between PF 2.4.x/MS ...
If one doesn't need the latest functionality of PF, one really don't
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se
More information about the MailScanner