Toralf Lund wrote:
> Philip Hazel wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, Toralf Lund wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> OK, it turns out that if I change the above setup to something like:
>>>
>>> all-users: :include:/usr/local/etc/mail.all
>>> all: all-users, toralf
>>>
>>> "all" does work, although "all-users" doesn't (when used directly as
>>> receiver
>>> address.) With
>>>
>>> all-users: :include:/usr/local/etc/mail.all
>>> all: all-users
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> all: :include:/usr/local/etc/mail.all, toralf
>>>
>>> it does not, i.e. I have to reference the address list file
>>> indirectly *and*
>>> include at least one other address in the alias expansion.
>>
>>
>> OK, that explains it. The answer is that the "exim" user cannot read
>> the file when it is verifying an address. When you have more than one
>> address for the alias, verification stops on the grounds that this is a
>> valid "mailing list". When you have only one address, verification
>> carries on to check that alias address. That's why having two users
>> works.
>>
>>
> Ah. I see. Well nearly; I checked if the file was readable, of course,
> in fact I made sure it was publicly accessible, i.e. it has
>
> ls -l /usr/local/etc/mail.all
> -rw-rw-r-- 1 root sys 235 Jan 26 11:00
> /usr/local/etc/mail.all
>
> However, I now suddenly realised that I have
>
> # su - exim
> UX:su: ERROR: No shell
>
> - maybe this is the real problem?
I don't think that's it, either. I have now changed the account setup,
and I can 'su' to exim and cat the file, but the error still occurs.
> Is denying normal login for "exim" in this manner generally a bad
> idea? (I should perhaps point out here that I've upgraded from a
> version that was built by someone else, and apparently configured to
> run as root rather than exim.)
>
>>
>
