FW: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sen der

RT Users
1

Thanks,

Yes, that’s exactly what my RT alias looks like. In my mail logs, I’m
getting the same error as referenced below, "generated |
‘/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate new_york comment’: Child process of address_pipe
transport returned 69 (could mean service or program unavailable) from
command: ‘/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate new_york comment’"From: Frances Russell [mailto:frussell@tpg.com.au]
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 10:28 PM
To: rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] FW: Mail delivery failed: returning message
to sender

What does your rt alias look like? It should be:

rt: “|/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate new_york correspond”

Frances

Has anyone ever encountered this problem? (See below). It happens
whenever I send mail to rt@my.domain.

RT 1.0.4
Linux 2.2.17
Apache 1.3.9
Exim

Thank you,
George Warnagiris
Network Administrator
Babcock & Brown LP

-----Original Message-----
From: Mail Delivery System [mailto:Mailer-Daemon@BabcockBrown.com]
mailto:[mailto:Mailer-Daemon@BabcockBrown.com] Sent: Friday,
February 23, 2001 8:53 PM To: gwarnagiris@BabcockBrown.com
mailto:gwarnagiris@BabcockBrown.com Subject: Mail delivery
failed:
returning message to sender

This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. A
message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. The following address(es) failed:
rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com:
mailto:rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com:
generated | “/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate new_york comment”:
Child process of address_pipe transport returned 69 (could mean
service or program unavailable) from command:
“/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate new_york comment”
------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers.
------ Return-path: <gwarnagiris@nymail.babcockbrown.com
mailto:gwarnagiris@nymail.babcockbrown.com > Received: from
[10.16.5.14] (helo=tiburon.babcockbrown.com)
by astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1
(Debian))
id 14WTtk-00007O-00
for <rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com
mailto:rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com >; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:53:24
-0500 Received: from nymail.ny.babcockbrown.com (localhost
[127.0.0.1])
by tiburon.babcockbrown.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id
RAA24584 for <rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com
mailto:rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com >; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 17:59:29
+0800 (GMT) Received: by nymail.ny.babcockbrown.com with Internet Mail
Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:02:01 -0500
Message-ID:
<970180E1A64FD2118F730008C71EA14E0165D1A4@nymail.ny.babcockbrown.com
<mailto:970180E1A64FD2118F730008C71EA14E0165D1A4@nymail.ny.babcockbrow
n.com> > From: George Warnagiris
<gwarnagiris@nymail.babcockbrown.com
mailto:gwarnagiris@nymail.babcockbrown.com >
To: “‘rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com’” <rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com
mailto:rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com > Subject: I can’t hear you I
have a banana in my ear Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:02:01 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=“iso-8859-1”

rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

2

I’ve checked the permissions and owners on rt-mailgate and they appear to be
in order. rt-mailgate is an alias pointing to suid_wrapper. suid_wrapper
is owned by rt, group root and permissions —s–x–x.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

GeorgeFrom: George Warnagiris [mailto:gwarnagiris@BabcockBrown.com]
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 11:46 AM
To: ‘frussell@tpg.com.au’; rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Subject: RE: [rt-users] FW: Mail delivery failed: returning message
to sen der

Thanks,

Yes, that’s exactly what my RT alias looks like. In my mail logs, I’m
getting the same error as referenced below, “generated |
‘/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate new_york comment’: Child process of address_pipe
transport returned 69 (could mean service or program unavailable) from
command: ‘/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate new_york comment’”

From: Frances Russell [mailto:frussell@tpg.com.au]
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 10:28 PM
To: rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] FW: Mail delivery failed: returning message
to sender

What does your rt alias look like? It should be:

rt: “|/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate new_york correspond”

Frances

Has anyone ever encountered this problem? (See below). It happens
whenever I send mail to rt@my.domain.

RT 1.0.4
Linux 2.2.17
Apache 1.3.9
Exim

Thank you,
George Warnagiris
Network Administrator
Babcock & Brown LP

-----Original Message-----
From: Mail Delivery System [mailto:Mailer-Daemon@BabcockBrown.com]
mailto:[mailto:Mailer-Daemon@BabcockBrown.com] Sent: Friday,
February 23, 2001 8:53 PM To: gwarnagiris@BabcockBrown.com
mailto:gwarnagiris@BabcockBrown.com Subject: Mail delivery
failed:
returning message to sender

This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. A
message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. The following address(es) failed:
rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com:
mailto:rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com:
generated | “/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate new_york comment”:
Child process of address_pipe transport returned 69 (could mean
service or program unavailable) from command:
“/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate new_york comment”
------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers.
------ Return-path: <gwarnagiris@nymail.babcockbrown.com
mailto:gwarnagiris@nymail.babcockbrown.com > Received: from
[10.16.5.14] (helo=tiburon.babcockbrown.com)
by astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1
(Debian))
id 14WTtk-00007O-00
for <rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com
mailto:rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com >; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:53:24
-0500 Received: from nymail.ny.babcockbrown.com (localhost
[127.0.0.1])
by tiburon.babcockbrown.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id
RAA24584 for <rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com
mailto:rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com >; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 17:59:29
+0800 (GMT) Received: by nymail.ny.babcockbrown.com with Internet Mail
Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:02:01 -0500
Message-ID:
<970180E1A64FD2118F730008C71EA14E0165D1A4@nymail.ny.babcockbrown.com
<mailto:970180E1A64FD2118F730008C71EA14E0165D1A4@nymail.ny.babcockbrow
n.com> > From: George Warnagiris
<gwarnagiris@nymail.babcockbrown.com
mailto:gwarnagiris@nymail.babcockbrown.com >
To: “‘rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com’” <rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com
mailto:rt@astoria.ny.babcockbrown.com > Subject: I can’t hear you I
have a banana in my ear Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:02:01 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=“iso-8859-1”

rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

3

I’ve often found that running grep mail.info or mail.log
often returns useful information. I don’t know what the return of 69 means,
but in the mail logs, a more useful error message may exist- for example, no
permissions to execute that file, a problem I had when using smrsh with
sendmail.

Jeff Lee
leejm@bwi.com

Thus wrote George Warnagiris (gwarnagiris@BabcockBrown.com) [01.02.26 11:39]:

4

I’ve often found that running grep mail.info or mail.log
often returns useful information. I don’t know what the return of 69 means,
but in the mail logs, a more useful error message may exist- for example, no
permissions to execute that file, a problem I had when using smrsh with
sendmail.

 EX_UNAVAILABLE (69)   A service is unavailable.  This can occur if a sup-
                       port program or file does not exist.  This can also
                       be used as a catchall message when something you
                       wanted to do doesn't work, but you don't know why.

J.D. Falk “The Internet isn’t just a publishing medium or a
Product Manager medium for commerce, it’s a social medium.”
Mail Abuse Prevention System LLC – Howard Rheingold

5

Thanks J.D.,

I’ve guessed that this is not an Exim problem. Mail seems to be flowing
fine. Unfortunately, there is not a clear error logged in the mail logs or
Apache logs. I think this is a problem with suid_wrapper.

Any other ideas?

George

PS - Here’s a copy of ls -l for /opt/rt/bin

dr-xr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Feb 23 20:50 cgi
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 23 20:50 rt →
/opt/rt/bin/suid_wrapper
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 23 20:50 rt-mailgate →
/opt/rt/bin/suid_wrapper
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 23 20:50 rtadmin →
/opt/rt/bin/suid_wrapper
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 2084 Feb 27 19:13 rtmux.pl
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root 2166 May 9 1999 rtmux.pl.orig
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 23 20:50 rtq →
/opt/rt/bin/suid_wrapper
-r–r–r-- 1 root root 31087 Feb 5 12:48 rtreports.gz
dr-xr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Feb 6 11:57 rtstats2
-r–r–r-- 1 root root 30720 Feb 6 11:23 rtstats2.tar
-r–r–r-- 1 root root 6154 Feb 6 11:19 rtstats2_tar.tar
—s–x–x 3 rt root 5835 Feb 23 20:50 suid_wrapperFrom: J.D. Falk [mailto:jdfalk@mail-abuse.org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 5:38 PM
To: rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] FW: Mail delivery failed: returning message
to sen der

I’ve often found that running grep mail.info or
mail.log
often returns useful information. I don’t know what the return of 69
means,
but in the mail logs, a more useful error message may exist- for example,
no
permissions to execute that file, a problem I had when using smrsh with
sendmail.

 EX_UNAVAILABLE (69)   A service is unavailable.  This can occur if a

sup-
port program or file does not exist. This can
also
be used as a catchall message when something you
wanted to do doesn’t work, but you don’t know
why.

J.D. Falk “The Internet isn’t just a publishing medium or
a
Product Manager medium for commerce, it’s a social
medium.”
Mail Abuse Prevention System LLC – Howard Rheingold

rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

6

The purpose of this message is to update the mail list with the solution to
this problem (see thread below).

According to the Exim FAQ (http://www.exim.org/FAQ.html#SEC34):

“I’m trying to get Exim to connect an alias to a pipe, but it always gives
error code 69, with the comment “(could mean service or program
unavailable)”.
A0033: If your alias entry looks like this:
alias: |”/some/command some parameters"
change it to look like this:
alias: “|/some/command some parameters”"

Sincere thanks to everyone who took some time to respond to or even read my
query.

Also, I have been wondering if there has been an effort to setup some kind
of paid support for RT installations, ala LinuxCare? Just curious if there
is a market for it. I know that our company would be willing to pay for
some support.

Thanks again,
GeorgeFrom: George Warnagiris [mailto:gwarnagiris@BabcockBrown.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 8:23 PM
To: ‘J.D. Falk’; rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Subject: RE: [rt-users] FW: Mail delivery failed: returning message
to sen der

Thanks J.D.,

I’ve guessed that this is not an Exim problem. Mail seems to be flowing
fine. Unfortunately, there is not a clear error logged in the mail logs or
Apache logs. I think this is a problem with suid_wrapper.

Any other ideas?

George

PS - Here’s a copy of ls -l for /opt/rt/bin

dr-xr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Feb 23 20:50 cgi
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 23 20:50 rt →
/opt/rt/bin/suid_wrapper
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 23 20:50 rt-mailgate →
/opt/rt/bin/suid_wrapper
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 23 20:50 rtadmin →
/opt/rt/bin/suid_wrapper
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 2084 Feb 27 19:13 rtmux.pl
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root 2166 May 9 1999 rtmux.pl.orig
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Feb 23 20:50 rtq →
/opt/rt/bin/suid_wrapper
-r–r–r-- 1 root root 31087 Feb 5 12:48 rtreports.gz
dr-xr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Feb 6 11:57 rtstats2
-r–r–r-- 1 root root 30720 Feb 6 11:23 rtstats2.tar
-r–r–r-- 1 root root 6154 Feb 6 11:19 rtstats2_tar.tar
—s–x–x 3 rt root 5835 Feb 23 20:50 suid_wrapper

From: J.D. Falk [mailto:jdfalk@mail-abuse.org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 5:38 PM
To: rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] FW: Mail delivery failed: returning message
to sen der

I’ve often found that running grep mail.info or
mail.log
often returns useful information. I don’t know what the return of 69
means,
but in the mail logs, a more useful error message may exist- for example,
no
permissions to execute that file, a problem I had when using smrsh with
sendmail.

 EX_UNAVAILABLE (69)   A service is unavailable.  This can occur if a

sup-
port program or file does not exist. This can
also
be used as a catchall message when something you
wanted to do doesn’t work, but you don’t know
why.

J.D. Falk “The Internet isn’t just a publishing medium or
a
Product Manager medium for commerce, it’s a social
medium.”
Mail Abuse Prevention System LLC – Howard Rheingold

rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users