Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!mp.cs.niu.edu!rickert
From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Sendmail 5.64 (Berkeley) coughs up an error on local SMTP
Keywords: help!
Message-ID: <1990Oct10.165138.26351@mp.cs.niu.edu>
Date: 10 Oct 90 16:51:38 GMT
References: <6828@uwm.edu>
Organization: Northern Illinois University
Lines: 41

In article <6828@uwm.edu> jgreco@archimedes.math.uwm.edu (Joe Greco) writes:
>Hello,
>
>I've just brought up a "new" version of sendmail, 5.64, to replace the older
>5.61 and give us MX record capabilities.
>
>jgreco@b... Connecting to banach.math.uwm.edu via inet...
>Trying 129.89.14.65...  connected.
>220 banach.math.uwm.edu BSD Sendmail 5.61/2.01 ready to mangle your mail at Mon, 8 Oct 90 18:03:20 -0500
>>>> HELO banach.math.uwm.edu
>553 Local configuration error, hostname not recognized as local
>
>I traced this down to line 200-205 in sendmail/src/srvrsmtp.c... it appears
>to be a very simple error and should probably read: "553 can't specify local
>host name" ... it appears to be a recursion trap.
>
>But (imho) Sendmail really should allow this kind of behaviour.  I commented
>out the offending code, as it doesn't seem to be something that is really
>all that configurable.
>
  Commenting out the code was a SERIOUS mistake.  That code is there
as you surmised, as a recursion trap.  Just wait till you have a bug in
'sendmail.cf' and find a rapidly growing number of 'sendmail.cf' processes
all talking to each other and forking.  And since the processes are owned
by root, per-user limitations won't help.  You'll probably have to crash the
system and restart it in single user mode, clear out the mail queue by hand,
and then go to muli-user mode.

  For what you were trying to do, all you needed was to use different
'sendmail.cf's for each version, and make sure that $j is differently defined
in each version.  The test is a comparison of the value of $j, and that is 
defined in 'sendmail.cf'.  (However the comparison may be a case-insensitive
comparison, so just changing the case my not hack it).  Since this seems to
have been mostly for testing, why not just have a technically wrong value
of $j in the test version.

-- 
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
  Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science               <rickert@cs.niu.edu>
  Northern Illinois Univ.
  DeKalb, IL 60115.                                  +1-815-753-6940