barsam@eros.ame.arizona.edu (Barsam Marasli) (03/11/88)
Does anybody have "sendmail" that would work on a Masscomp
running RTU V3.1B, and V1.2 compilers ?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barsam Marasli # Speak slowly, I hear with an accent #
Internet: eros!barsam@arizona.edu
UUCP : ...{allegra,ihnp4,cmcl2,hao!noao}!arizona!eros!barsam
Bitnet : barsam@arizrvaxstevo@jane.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Steve Groom) (03/12/88)
In article <453@amethyst.UUCP> eros!barsam@arizona.edu writes: > >Does anybody have "sendmail" that would work on a Masscomp >running RTU V3.1B, and V1.2 compilers ? MASSCOMP makes a version of sendmail that is not yet considered official. We have been running the unofficial (and unsupported, I might add) version for about the last year. At that time we were running RTU 3.1 and V1.1 compilers, I think, though we're now at RTU 4.0beta, with V1.4 prelim. compilers. It has had some problems, (for instance, it doesn't handle correctly addresses with both !'s and @'s on the same line, and since the addresses it gets usually look like that...), but is mostly usable for local mail. That's why we hounded them for a copy in the first place. Without sendmail, our MASSCOMP would be unable to communicate with the rest of our world (mostly Suns), and the odds are against Sun wanting to supply a MASSCOMP-compatible mailer :-). From what I understand, RTU 4.0 (early summer 88?) is going to include Sendmail. The 4.0 beta kit we got included sendmail, but it was so broken (the install kit had bad files in it, and put things in bad places - i.e. trashed /bin/mail, etc.) we had to claw our way back to our unsupported prerelease version. They later told me that sendmail was not supposed to be included in the beta release, and to ignore it. Ha! These people printed and sent me some of the best documentation on the sendmail config file I've ever seen, and then they say, "oops, we didn't mean to print that and send it to you." I think that it was just busted, and rather than getting into problems fixing it for everyone they just said "sorry, just ignore that stuff." Remember, this will be (is?) their first official release of sendmail, so many of their customers may never have seen sendmail before. Anyway, when they fix it, you'll have it. BTW, we had to really pester them for our prerelease version. I don't expect they'll be too anxious to give it to anyone, especially if the official release is right around the corner. -steve /* Steve Groom, MS 168-522, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA 91109 * Internet: stevo@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov UUCP: {ames,cit-vax}!elroy!stevo * Disclaimer: (thick German accent) "I know noothingg! Noothingg!" */
rsalz@bbn.com (Rich Salz) (03/12/88)
>From what I understand, RTU 4.0 (early summer 88?) is going to include >Sendmail. ... An article in comp.sys.masscomp said that the supported mailer for RTU4.0 will be MMDF, and that sendmail will probably be available as an unsupported program. /r$ -- Please send comp.sources.unix-related mail to rsalz@uunet.uu.net.
rganesh@FSUCS.CS.FSU.EDU (Ganesh Rangarajan, csg) (07/13/89)
Regarding the above subject , I have a few questions.
1) Recently, we have been having a lot of mail stuck in the queues
due to an error due to a Bad File Number. It is not due to the absence
of the control files either. I would like to get some feedback from
anyone who has encountered such a problem before.
2) We are currently running version 1.2/25 of sendmail on our
machine here. It is a vax running the Ultrix OS . Does anyone know
of anonymous ftp sites where a newer version of sendmail be picked up?
The system is BSD 4.2 compatible. Therefore I am
looking for a version which will2compile under ULTRIX. Is there a MX
version of this?
Please respond with E-Mail to the address below:
rganesh@nu.cs.fsu.edu (Internet)
rganesh@fsucs.cs.fsu.edu
ganesh@fsu.bitnet (Bitnet)rganesh@FSUCS.CS.FSU.EDU (Ganesh Rangarajan, csg) (07/24/89)
I recently obtained a copy of sendmail for the Ultrix. It consults the
name server fine. However, I encountered the following problem with the mailer
and I will be happy if someone can give me clues on this.
If a local user sends mail to someone with a .forward file on the same
machine, the message is forwarded to the host specified in the .forward.
However, if a user from another machine sends the same message, the .forward
is not consulted and the message is lost forever. The mailq indicates the
message belonging to the MAILER-DEAMON instead of the original sender.
For example:
I have a .forward on fsucs : user@nu.cs.fsu.edu.
>From fsucs if I type: mail user then the mail reaches the user at nu.
However if a person on nu sends mail : user@fsucs, theoretically the mail
should be forwarded to user@nu.cs.fsu.edu. But the mail gets lost!!!
Any comments will be appreciated.
--Ganesh
rganesh@fsucs.cs.fsu.edu
rganesh@nu.cs.fsu.edu
ganesh@fsu.bitnet