Upgraded to rt 3.2, and am seeing this now:
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/pickup[38801]: 6277734D61: uid=65534
from=
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/cleanup[38834]: 6277734D61:
message-id=rt-3.2.0-22917-118763-6.12.2135142317676@intelenet.net
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/cleanup[38834]: 6277734D61: to=,
relay=cleanup, delay=0, status=bounced (No recipients specified)
System is running perl 5.8.4 on freebsd. That error came on a reply to
an existing ticket. All expected watchers got the update.
How to fix?
matthew zeier - “Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be
understood.” - Marie Curie
Upgraded to rt 3.2, and am seeing this now:
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/pickup[38801]: 6277734D61: uid=65534
from=
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/cleanup[38834]: 6277734D61:
message-id=rt-3.2.0-22917-118763-6.12.2135142317676@intelenet.net
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/cleanup[38834]: 6277734D61: to=,
relay=cleanup, delay=0, status=bounced (No recipients specified)
System is running perl 5.8.4 on freebsd. That error came on a reply to
an existing ticket. All expected watchers got the update.
What was in RT’s logs for that message id?
Upgraded to rt 3.2, and am seeing this now:
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/pickup[38801]: 6277734D61: uid=65534
from=
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/cleanup[38834]: 6277734D61:
message-id=rt-3.2.0-22917-118763-6.12.2135142317676@intelenet.net
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/cleanup[38834]: 6277734D61: to=,
relay=cleanup, delay=0, status=bounced (No recipients specified)
System is running perl 5.8.4 on freebsd. That error came on a reply to
an existing ticket. All expected watchers got the update.
What was in RT’s logs for that message id?
Set($LogToSyslog , ‘debug’);
syslog doesn’t show anything like that - is there a different log level I
should be using?
I looked at the headers of the emails that bounced. The To: header is
botched -To: “Owner of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
To: “OtherRecipients of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
To: “AdminCc of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”:;
Clicking on Show on the Outgoing email record shows the same headers. I was
surprised about OtherRecipients because that actually appears under
“Messages about this ticket will not be sent to…”.
From: “matthew zeier” mrz@intelenet.net
To: “Jesse Vincent” jesse@bestpractical.com
Cc: rt-devel@lists.fsck.com
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 9:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Rt-devel] mails to empty list, 3.2
Upgraded to rt 3.2, and am seeing this now:
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/pickup[38801]: 6277734D61: uid=65534
from=
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/cleanup[38834]: 6277734D61:
message-id=rt-3.2.0-22917-118763-6.12.2135142317676@intelenet.net
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/cleanup[38834]: 6277734D61:
to=,
relay=cleanup, delay=0, status=bounced (No recipients specified)
System is running perl 5.8.4 on freebsd. That error came on a reply
to
an existing ticket. All expected watchers got the update.
What was in RT’s logs for that message id?
Set($LogToSyslog , ‘debug’);
syslog doesn’t show anything like that - is there a different log level I
should be using?
Rt-devel mailing list
Rt-devel@lists.bestpractical.com
The rt-devel Archives
I looked at the headers of the emails that bounced. The To: header is
botched -
What about that is botched?
I looked at the headers of the emails that bounced. The To: header is
botched -
What about that is botched?
They aren’t valid email address… username@host, for instance.
To: “Owner of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
To: “OtherRecipients of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
To: “AdminCc of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”:;
Clicking on Show on the Outgoing email record shows the same headers. I
was
I looked at the headers of the emails that bounced. The To: header is
botched -
What about that is botched?
They aren’t valid email address… username@host, for instance.
I may have stated that incorrectly.
Nonetheless, I have bouncing emails and I don’t know how to track this down
(and it’s late, or getting there).
To: “Owner of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
To: “OtherRecipients of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
To: “AdminCc of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”:;
Clicking on Show on the Outgoing email record shows the same headers.
I
I looked at the headers of the emails that bounced. The To:
header is
botched -
What about that is botched?
They aren’t valid email address… username@host, for instance.
I may have stated that incorrectly.
Nonetheless, I have bouncing emails and I don’t know how to track this
down
(and it’s late, or getting there).
I’m seeing the same thing… But I think this is because of the default
scrips, but so far I have not dared to begin to remove any of them to
test it out.
RT logs having sent to Owner, OtherRecipients and AdminCc on every
correspondence. But Only the Requestor is supposed to get it, as the
one who own it shouldn’t get it (I seem to remember setting it to not
sending email to the one who did the correspondance…), and correctly
doesn’t get it. It’s just strange that it logs that it has been sent…
-HK
To: “Owner of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
That looks like the FriendlyTo line. Maybe try setting
$UseFriendlyToLine to false?
Michael
Michael S. Liebman m-liebman@northwestern.edu
http://msl521.freeshell.org/
“I have vision and the rest of the world wears bifocals.”
-Paul Newman in “Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid”
Upgraded to rt 3.2, and am seeing this now:
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/pickup[38801]: 6277734D61: uid=65534
from=
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/cleanup[38834]: 6277734D61:
message-id=rt-3.2.0-22917-118763-6.12.2135142317676@intelenet.net
Jul 1 20:09:06 help1 postfix/cleanup[38834]: 6277734D61: to=,
relay=cleanup, delay=0, status=bounced (No recipients specified)
System is running perl 5.8.4 on freebsd. That error came on a reply to
an existing ticket. All expected watchers got the update.
What was in RT’s logs for that message id?
Set($LogToSyslog , ‘debug’);
syslog doesn’t show anything like that - is there a different log level I
should be using?
It logs to the syslog service. You may have syslog configured to put
information in /var/log/messages, for example.
What was in RT’s logs for that message id?
Set($LogToSyslog , ‘debug’);
syslog doesn’t show anything like that - is there a different log
level I
should be using?
It logs to the syslog service. You may have syslog configured to put
information in /var/log/messages, for example.
You misunderstand - RT’s logging to syslog just fine but it’s not
logging the “message id” that you asked for (infact, no errors after I
upgraded Text::Quote). It’s set to “debug” which appears to be the
lowest log level, unless there’s another one that tells me “message
id”.
matthew zeier - “Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be
understood.” - Marie Curie
It logs to the syslog service. You may have syslog configured to put
information in /var/log/messages, for example.
You misunderstand - RT’s logging to syslog just fine but it’s not
logging the “message id” that you asked for (infact, no errors after I
upgraded Text::Quote). It’s set to “debug” which appears to be the
lowest log level, unless there’s another one that tells me “message
id”.
Well, my RT instance puts some information in /var/log/messages and
some in /var/log/syslog. (And for various reasons, other information in
apache’s error log.
In the interest in solving this, what am I grep’ing for? The rt message id?
rt-3.2.0-22917-118763-6.12.2135142317676@intelenet.net ?
(I don’t see that in any file under /var/log or in /var/log/httpd.)----- Original Message -----
From: “Jesse Vincent” jesse@bestpractical.com
To: “matthew zeier” mrz@intelenet.net
Cc: rt-devel@lists.fsck.com
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 8:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Rt-devel] mails to empty list, 3.2
It logs to the syslog service. You may have syslog configured to put
information in /var/log/messages, for example.
You misunderstand - RT’s logging to syslog just fine but it’s not
logging the “message id” that you asked for (infact, no errors after I
upgraded Text::Quote). It’s set to “debug” which appears to be the
lowest log level, unless there’s another one that tells me “message
id”.
Well, my RT instance puts some information in /var/log/messages and
some in /var/log/syslog. (And for various reasons, other information in
apache’s error log.
–
matthew zeier - “Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be
understood.” - Marie Curie
–
To: “Owner of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
That looks like the FriendlyTo line. Maybe try setting
$UseFriendlyToLine to false?
The docs imply then that I would be left with an empty string, no?
In the interest in solving this, what am I grep’ing for? The rt message id?
rt-3.2.0-22917-118763-6.12.2135142317676@intelenet.net ?
(I don’t see that in any file under /var/log or in /var/log/httpd.)
Yes. Also “Scrip” or “RT” elsewhere in your syslog configuration.
You could also crank up RT’s “LogToScreen” directive and everything
shoul;d get into your apache error log. This stuff gets logged on every
RT server I’ve touched. And without it, we’re SOL for debugging what’s
going on.
In the interest in solving this, what am I grep’ing for? The rt message
id?
rt-3.2.0-22917-118763-6.12.2135142317676@intelenet.net ?
(I don’t see that in any file under /var/log or in /var/log/httpd.)
Yes. Also “Scrip” or “RT” elsewhere in your syslog configuration.
You could also crank up RT’s “LogToScreen” directive and everything
shoul;d get into your apache error log. This stuff gets logged on every
RT server I’ve touched. And without it, we’re SOL for debugging what’s
going on.
First, my apologies to Jesse - late night debugging… never a good idea. I
flipped on logging to a file.
I’ve attached a short 43 line log file. I don’t know how to interpret this
other than the recipients are valid email addresses except for the action
that emails a queue watcher and the ticket creator.
Appreciate the help.
rt.txt (4.95 KB)
To: “Owner of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
That looks like the FriendlyTo line. Maybe try setting
$UseFriendlyToLine to false?
The docs imply then that I would be left with an empty string, no?
Yes, which is fine if you have BCC’s. That will usually render as
“undisclosed recipients”.
Michael
Michael S. Liebman m-liebman@northwestern.edu
http://msl521.freeshell.org/
“I have vision and the rest of the world wears bifocals.”
-Paul Newman in “Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid”
This is a show stopper for me and I saw at least one other post with a
similiar problem.
Anyone know how to resolve this?From: “matthew zeier” mrz@intelenet.net
To: “Jesse Vincent” jesse@bestpractical.com
Cc: rt-devel@lists.fsck.com
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Rt-devel] mails to empty list, 3.2
In the interest in solving this, what am I grep’ing for? The rt
message
id?
rt-3.2.0-22917-118763-6.12.2135142317676@intelenet.net ?
(I don’t see that in any file under /var/log or in /var/log/httpd.)
Yes. Also “Scrip” or “RT” elsewhere in your syslog configuration.
You could also crank up RT’s “LogToScreen” directive and everything
shoul;d get into your apache error log. This stuff gets logged on every
RT server I’ve touched. And without it, we’re SOL for debugging what’s
going on.
First, my apologies to Jesse - late night debugging… never a good idea.
I
flipped on logging to a file.
I’ve attached a short 43 line log file. I don’t know how to interpret
this
other than the recipients are valid email addresses except for the action
that emails a queue watcher and the ticket creator.
Appreciate the help.
Rt-devel mailing list
Rt-devel@lists.bestpractical.com
The rt-devel Archives
What about that is botched?
To: “Owner of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
To: “OtherRecipients of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
To: “AdminCc of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”:;
There must not be more than one “To” header field. See RFC 2822,
section 3.6, the part that says “The following table indicates limits on
the number of times each field may occur in a message header”.
The following would be acceptable:
"OtherRecipients of intelenet.net Ticket #22917":; ,
"AdminCc of intelenet.net Ticket #22917":;
That’s an “address-list” that contains a comma-separated list of “group”
constructs. See RFC 2822 section 3.4 for the syntax of “address-list”,
“address” and “group”. It’s split onto multiple lines, using what RFC
2822 calls “folding”.
–apb (Alan Barrett)
What about that is botched?
To: “Owner of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
To: “OtherRecipients of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”: ;
To: “AdminCc of intelenet.net Ticket #22917”:;
There must not be more than one “To” header field. See RFC 2822,
section 3.6, the part that says “The following table indicates limits on
the number of times each field may occur in a message header”.
I’m pretty sure that the original author was giving three examples, not
one example of a three-To: message. I can’t imagine a codepath through
RT that would generate the above in one message.