On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Daniel Tiefnig wrote:
> Hmm, looks very good. :o)
Hooray!
> OpenSSL/2125 still fails like it did the last time.
I may have to start sending you patches for that. I did change the name
of a cipher to one that I thought should be recognisable.
> maildir/5000 exim quota + warn threshold with maildir
> ===============
> Lines 3-6 of "test-mail-munged" do not match lines 3-6 of
> "mail/5000.new/1.myhost.test.ex".
> ----------
> id 10HmaZ-0005vi-00
> for userx@???; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 09:44:33 +0000
> maildir:maildir_
> Message-Id: <E10HmaZ-0005vi-00@???>
> ----------
> id 10HmaY-0005vi-00
> for userx@???; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 09:44:33 +0000
> maildir:maildir_
> Message-Id: <E10HmaY-0005vi-00@???>
>
> The MessageID is different, hard to spot at the first glance.
> test-mail-munged also contains lots of the following line:
> aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
That may be a hard one; different message ids usually means a timing
effect has put the messages into a different order.
> The failing address here is x@[abcd::dcba], I'd guess this is due to
> missing IPv6 support. Maybe you should split this into two tests and
> omit the last one if IPv6 support is missing.
Yes, indeed. That's what I'm supposed to be doing (in general), but I
clearly overlooked that one.
I'll see if I can figure out how to fix those when I do the next batch
of updates next week.
Philip
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
Get the Exim 4 book: http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book
