[antispam-f] Re: Deferred message problem
- From: Frank de Bruijn <antispam@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: antispam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 21:36:59 +0200
In article <13ca4f6950.ricp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Richard Porter <ricp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10 Jun 2009 Frank de Bruijn wrote:
[snip]
> > Not sure if this is still happening these days, but I suppose
> > there's no reason to expect it to go way by itself. :-)
> Yes, it still happens from time to time.
> > The interesting bit here is the rule number (1) and the fact the
> > message was deferred because of its length. Harriet reported
> > something similar in her message of 7 October (the first one to the
> > list after FreeLists borked my subscription). I'll investigate.
A very nasty bit of flu (no, not that one...) has stopped me from
looking at this until now.
Unfortunately, I can't reproduce the problem. I've set up the pseudo
server with a similar set of messages (i.e. one very large one to be
deferred by length on the first rule, followed by some smaller ones that
trigger different rules), but it all works as expected. There must be
some particular combination of settings involved.
If it happens again, could you send me (off list) a zip containing a
copy of:
- your Rules file;
- your Settings file;
- your mailbox log file;
- the IDs file as it is before manually changing things in the Marking
window;
- the headers of the messages involved.
All as complete as possible, but without any sensitive info, like user
names and passwords.
> The DEFER rule is in fact Rule 1 in my Rules file. However I notice
> that "Rule 1" is also quoted when a marked message is accepted or
> deleted.
Yes, that's how it works. When there are any messages to handle in the
Marking window, all rules move up by one and 'Process Marked Message'
becomes rule 1.
Regards,
Frank
Other related posts:
