On Tue, 2002-10-15 at 22:43, Greg Ward wrote:
> [follow up on exim-users please -- let's try to keep this on one list]
[loud cheer - I nearly pushed it all to the mailman list yesterday as I
have to approve all posts from the mailman guys who are not on the exim
list :-) ]
2 comments spring to mind, one pedantic, one more useful...
First the pedantic....
> The drawback of this configuration is that it will work poorly on
> systems supporting lists in several different mail domains. While
> Mailman handles virtual domains, it does not yet support having two
[I would add the word "distinct" at this point]
> lists with the same name in different virtual domains, using the same
> Mailman installation. This will eventually change. (But see below for
> a variation on this scheme that should accomodate virtual domains
> better.)
[End pedant mode]
> Routers for Exim 4
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> mailman_main_router:
> driver = accept
> require_files = MAILMAN_HOME/lists/$local_part/config.pck
> transport = mailman_transport
>
> mailman_router:
> driver = accept
> require_files = MAILMAN_HOME/lists/$local_part/config.pck
> local_part_suffix = -bounces : -bounces+* : \
> -confirm+* : -join : -leave : \
> -owner : -request : -admin
> transport = mailman_transport
These two routers differ *only* in the suffix handling (there used to be
more than one transport, but the transports are common now).... so we
can collapse them into a single router:-
# Single mailman (list) handling router. Handles both
# the administration addresses (which have suffixes on)
# and the (bare) list post address.
mailman_router:
driver = accept
require_files = MAILMAN_HOME/lists/$local_part/config.pck
local_part_suffix_optional
local_part_suffix = -bounces : -bounces+* : \
-confirm+* : -join : -leave : \
-owner : -request : -admin
transport = mailman_transport
Obviously exactly the same can be done for exim3 directors.
Nigel.
--
[ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@??? ]
[ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
