Mailing List Archive: exim: users

Upgrading mailman from 3.31 to 4.04-exiscan

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

amell at cambridge

Apr 26, 2002, 5:30 AM

Post #1 of 6 (1113 views)
Permalink

Upgrading mailman from 3.31 to 4.04-exiscan

We are in the process of upgrading our exim to the latest version with
exiscan support.

Works a treat!

One problem:

The mailman entries in my old configure file will not port across, I cant
find anything obvious in the documentation as to why lc: does not work any
more. It should work surely?

2002-04-26 13:27:23 H=(gimli.bookbank.co.uk) [213.219.8.171]
F=<webeditor [at] thebookseller> temporarily rejected RCPT
<username [at] cup>: failed to expand "/home/mailman/lists/${lc" for
require_files: "${lc" is not a known operator (or a } is missing in a
variable reference)

Heres the relevant bit of my configure file, Ive tried quoting and
unquoting lines and for the life of me cant see whats wrong. Its probably
staring me in the face, as no doubt someone is about to tell me?

# wrapper script for mailman
MAILMAN_HOME=/home/mailman
MAILMAN_WRAP=MAILMAN_HOME/mail/wrapper
# user and group for mailman
MAILMAN_UID=mailman
MAILMAN_GID=mailman

list_owner_director:
driver = redirect
allow_defer
allow_fail
data = ${lc:$local_part}-admin@${domain}
local_part_suffix = "-owner"
require_files = MAILMAN_HOME/lists/${lc:$local_part}/config.db
retry_use_local_part

owner_list_director:
driver = redirect
allow_defer
allow_fail
data = ${lc:$local_part}-admin@${domain}
local_part_prefix = "owner-"
require_files = MAILMAN_HOME/lists/${lc:$local_part}/config.db
retry_use_local_part

##
## Next 3 directors direct admin, request and list mail to the appropriate
## transport. List existence is checked as above.

list_admin_director:
driver = accept
local_part_suffix = -admin
require_files = MAILMAN_HOME/lists/${lc:$local_part}/config.db
retry_use_local_part
transport = list_admin_transport

list_request_director:
driver = accept
local_part_suffix = -request
require_files = MAILMAN_HOME/lists/${lc:$local_part}/config.db
retry_use_local_part
transport = list_request_transport

list_director:
driver = accept
require_files = MAILMAN_HOME/lists/${lc:$local_part}/config.db
retry_use_local_part
transport = list_transport

## Three transports for list mail, request mail and admin mail
## respectively
## Mailman is installed in MAILMAN_HOME
## Mailman is configured to be invoked as user mailman

list_transport:
driver = pipe
command = MAILMAN_WRAP post ${lc:$local_part}
current_directory = MAILMAN_HOME
group = MAILMAN_GID
home_directory = MAILMAN_HOME
user = MAILMAN_UID

list_request_transport:
driver = pipe
command = MAILMAN_WRAP mailcmd ${lc:$local_part}
current_directory = MAILMAN_HOME
group = MAILMAN_GID
home_directory = MAILMAN_HOME
user = MAILMAN_UID

list_admin_transport:
driver = pipe
command = MAILMAN_WRAP mailowner ${lc:$local_part}
current_directory = MAILMAN_HOME
group = MAILMAN_GID
home_directory = MAILMAN_HOME
user = MAILMAN_UID

Thanks

Andy

exim at lists

Apr 26, 2002, 6:01 AM

Post #2 of 6 (1050 views)
Permalink

Re: Upgrading mailman from 3.31 to 4.04-exiscan [In reply to]

On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 01:30:48PM +0100, Andy Mell wrote:
> The mailman entries in my old configure file will not port across, I cant
> find anything obvious in the documentation as to why lc: does not work any
> more. It should work surely?

Thread beginning:
http://www.exim.org/pipermail/exim-users/Week-of-Mon-20020114/034102.html

MBM

--
Matthew Byng-Maddick <mbm [at] colondot> http://colondot.net/

Jochen.Erwied at mbs-software

Apr 26, 2002, 6:13 AM

Post #3 of 6 (1050 views)
Permalink

Re: Upgrading mailman from 3.31 to 4.04-exiscan [In reply to]

Friday, April 26, 2002, 2:30:48 PM, you wrote:

> list_owner_director:
> driver = redirect
> allow_defer
> allow_fail
> data = ${lc:$local_part}-admin@${domain}
> local_part_suffix = "-owner"
> require_files = MAILMAN_HOME/lists/${lc:$local_part}/config.db
> retry_use_local_part

make that 'lc::$', i. e. double the colon. I trapped over this
somewhile ago.

Exim is acting caselessly anyway (except if configured otherwise using
for example 'caseful_local_part'), so you might think about removing
the ${lc:$local_part} completely.

--
mbs GmbH | http://www.mbs-software.de
Jochen Erwied | mailto:Jochen.Erwied [at] mbs-software
Roemerstr. 15 | phone: +49-2151-7294-0
47809 Krefeld | fax: +49-2151-7294-50

exim at lists

Apr 26, 2002, 6:30 AM

Post #4 of 6 (1051 views)
Permalink

Re: Upgrading mailman from 3.31 to 4.04-exiscan [In reply to]

On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 03:13:37PM +0200, Jochen Erwied wrote:
> Exim is acting caselessly anyway (except if configured otherwise using
> for example 'caseful_local_part'), so you might think about removing
> the ${lc:$local_part} completely.

Erm exim may well be, but I think you might need to go look up your UNIX
file system semantics.

MBM

--
Matthew Byng-Maddick <mbm [at] colondot> http://colondot.net/

Jochen.Erwied at mbs-software

Apr 26, 2002, 6:49 AM

Post #5 of 6 (1061 views)
Permalink

Re: Upgrading mailman from 3.31 to 4.04-exiscan [In reply to]

Friday, April 26, 2002, 3:30:43 PM, you wrote:

> Erm exim may well be, but I think you might need to go look up your UNIX
> file system semantics.

I know the UNIX filesystem is case sensitive, but:

If the mailing list is generated using only lowercase letters, the
${lc} is not needed. If it is created using mixed case, exim has no
chance to detect the correct spelling and the ${lc} is useless or even
wrong.

Local parts are usually handled caselessly (RFC 2821 states they MAY
be case-sensitive). Only postmaster MUST be case-insensitive.

--
mbs GmbH | http://www.mbs-software.de
Jochen Erwied | mailto:Jochen.Erwied [at] mbs-software
Roemerstr. 15 | phone: +49-2151-7294-0
47809 Krefeld | fax: +49-2151-7294-50

exim at lists

Apr 26, 2002, 6:56 AM

Post #6 of 6 (1044 views)
Permalink

Re: Upgrading mailman from 3.31 to 4.04-exiscan [In reply to]

On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 03:49:23PM +0200, Jochen Erwied wrote:
> Friday, April 26, 2002, 3:30:43 PM, [MBM] wrote:
> > Erm exim may well be, but I think you might need to go look up your UNIX
> > file system semantics.
> I know the UNIX filesystem is case sensitive, but:

Sorry, I missed the bit in the spec where it said that without the
caseful_local_part option it lowercased the local-part. I thought it
just did case-insensitive matching on it.

Personally, I'd say "leave the ${lc" in anyway, because you may at some
point decide you need caseful local-parts or that you may change the
way things are done.

MBM

--
Matthew Byng-Maddick <mbm [at] colondot> http://colondot.net/

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads