[Exim] Re[4]: errors_tell option? - PQN10630VCJ

Página Principal
Apagar esta mensagem
Responder a esta mensagem
Autor: Philip Hazel
Data:  
Para: Christian Stuellenberg
CC: exim-users
Assunto: [Exim] Re[4]: errors_tell option? - PQN10630VCJ
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Christian Stuellenberg wrote:

> So, I looked at deliver.c lines 5626ff. Seems so, as if it should be
> easily possible instead of using only one message with an Bcc set to
> the errors_copy addresses, to use an additional FILE *f2 (do we also
> need another subprocess for that?) to construct another message for
> the errors_copy addresses.


If you want to provide an errors_tell without the body internally, then
yes, that is what you would have to do, and another process would have
to be used.

> What do you think about such an "hack"?


It would work, but I think it is something that is of quite minority
interest. I don't think many people use errors_tell. We certainly do not
- our postmaster mailboxes would be bursting.

I suspect errors_tell is useful only in small companies where there may
be only one or two bounce messages a day.

So, what I'm saying is that I think this is something I would rate at a
very low priority. I'm sorry about that, but the Wish List is already
very long!

Regards,
Philip

--
Philip Hazel            University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@???      Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.