------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
http://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=266
Nigel Metheringham <nigel@???> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|Exim 4.72 |Exim 4.73
Phil Pennock <pdp@???> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |pdp@???
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |WONTFIX
--- Comment #3 from Phil Pennock <pdp@???> 2010-06-06 06:38:10 ---
Fundamentally bad idea. If local_scan is crashing, we can't guarantee that we
have the data unmolested and can't meet the requirement to not arbitrarily lose
data. The *only* safe way is to cause the last place which has the data
known-intact to retry later.
If someone has flaky code, it's probably best to package it up as a daemon
which can be talked to remotely via ${readsocket} or ${run} or av_scanner
cmdline and handle things with some degree of isolation. But for code which
crashes inside the Exim process space, this is a definite WONTFIX.
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugs.exim.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
