Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!samsung!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!nikhefh!e07 From: e07@nikhefh.nikhef.nl (Eric Wassenaar) Newsgroups: comp.bugs.4bsd Subject: Re: error handling bug in sendoff() of sendmail 5.65 Message-ID: <1227@nikhefh.nikhef.nl> Date: 7 May 91 14:13:57 GMT References: <1991May7.114948.16201@mp.cs.niu.edu> Sender: e07@nikhef.nl (Eric Wassenaar) Organization: Nikhef-H, Amsterdam (the Netherlands). Lines: 18 In article <1991May7.114948.16201@mp.cs.niu.edu>, rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes: > In article <1225@nikhefh.nikhef.nl> e07@nikhefh.nikhef.nl (Eric Wassenaar) writes: > > It makes sense though, to override this by EX_TEMPFAIL in case of > > a failing fork(). > Why exactly does this make sense? EX_OSERR already causes the message to > be requeued, so what is the benefit of changing toe EX_TEMPFAIL ? Because unfortunately I was looking at an old version of sendmail, in which messages were requeued by markfailure() only for EX_TEMPFAIL. The latest versions indeed will requeue on status codes EX_TEMPFAIL, EX_IOERR, and EX_OSERR in markfailure(). Eric Wassenaar -- Organization: NIKHEF-H, National Institute for Nuclear and High-Energy Physics Address: Kruislaan 409, P.O. Box 41882, 1009 DB Amsterdam, the Netherlands Phone: +31 20 592 0412, Home: +31 20 6909449, Telefax: +31 20 592 5155 Internet: e07@nikhef.nl