Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 17:27:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 17:26:57 -0500 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.129]:19428 "EHLO e31.bld.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 17:26:40 -0500 Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 17:23:53 -0500 (EST) From: Richard A Nelson To: "Jeff V. Merkey" cc: , Subject: Re: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue In-Reply-To: <3A0C7139.DDD81E67@timpanogas.org> Message-ID: X-No-Markup: yes x-No-ProductLinks: yes x-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > Then perhaps qmail's time has finally come .... If sendmail cannot run > on a machine with minimal background loading from a dozen or so FTP > clients downloading files, it's clearly sick. BTW. I have another box > running qmail, and it doesn't have these problems. I have several boxen running sendmail with fair to moderate loading - they even occasionally don't accept mail... and thats good, as it lets the system catch up with its current load. As soon as things stabalize, sendmail again accepts connections - you *do* have MX entries don't you? I've *never* had the problem you've got with *any* of the boxes - maybe you should rethink your setup. I'll wager that the qmail box isn't as heavily loaded as the one running sendmail; why not split your services? -- Rick Nelson There are two types of Linux developers - those who can spell, and those who can't. There is a constant pitched battle between the two. (From one of the post-1.1.54 kernel update messages posted to c.o.l.a) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/