On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Simon Barr wrote:
> Don't you sometimes really, really hate computers?
Yes.
> Having worked for 5 days it let me send an email telling you all it
> was working as it should. Then it went wrong!! Aaagghh.
> So it looks like just logging the traffic hasn't fixed it, just
> drastically reduced the error rate.
Which suggests that the problem is something to do with timing.
> globals.c:int smtp_receive_timeout = 5*60;
>
> Could this be the source of the problem? Spamc must be either hanging
> or dragging its heels in passing the mail back to Exim, which is timeing
> out, giving me my error. Shouldn't Exim mention this timeout in the log
> though instead of the 'returned 2' error?
If this really is happening, it should do both! Remember, there are two
instances of Exim involved here: the first is delivering the message,
and the second is receiving it back again. The first should log a
the delivery failure, and the second should log the incoming timeout.
An obvious experiment: set smtp_receive_timeout = 4m and see if the
intervals change to 4 minutes.
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
