Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!uunet!mcsun!unido!pbinfo!michael From: michael@uni-paderborn.de (Michael Schmidt) Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail Subject: Re: Problem: mail spool area and .forward on different machines Message-ID: Date: 13 Nov 90 10:01:08 GMT References: <1990Nov1.102200@ap.co.umist.ac.uk> <2549@ztivax.UUCP> <1990Nov7.182736.31025@mp.cs.niu.edu> Sender: news@uni-paderborn.de (News Uni-Paderborn) Organization: Uni Paderborn, Germany Lines: 20 In-Reply-To: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu's message of 7 Nov 90 18:27:36 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: athene >>>>> About Re: Problem: mail spool area and .forward on different >>>>> machines, Neil Rickert said: Neil> You might have to test it to see what happens. There are some Neil> causes of failure for which binmail returns a status to sendmail Neil> such that the message is queued for future delivery. If, for Neil> example, the local sender has set a ulimit which is too small Neil> for the recipient's current mailbox size, the final delivery by Neil> binmail fails but, at least on my system, the mail is requeued. Neil> Next time the queue is run it works, because sendmail then is a Neil> child of the root daemon, and has not executed the sender's Neil> '.login' which set the ulimit. ulimit? Wattsat? (:-) I just checked the binmail sources (both 4.3 and from sendmail-5.65+). There is only one exit with EX_TEMPFAIL and that is in the case, that execv(sendmail) fails. -- Michael Schmidt, FB 17, Uni-GH Paderborn, Warburgerstr. 100, D-4790 Paderborn, West Germany Mail: michael@pbinfo.UUCP or michael@uni-paderborn.de