Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 17:42:35 +0200 From: Andrea Campi <andrea+freebsd_stable@webcom.it> To: Niki Denev <nike_d@cytexbg.com> Cc: Luke Crawford <lsc@prgmr.com>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: background fsck can be dangerous! Message-ID: <20050703154235.GB64535@webcom.it> In-Reply-To: <42C71914.9090503@cytexbg.com> References: <200506291704.50185.ndenev@icdsoft.com> <20050630174315.C66660@mail.prgmr.com> <42C71914.9090503@cytexbg.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jul 03, 2005 at 01:45:40AM +0300, Niki Denev wrote:
> Before the background fsck finished some files were unreadable,
> and they happened to be some libraries used by my mail software.
> After the fsck finished these libraries were accessible again and
> everything was normal and working, at least this is what it looked
> like to me.
> So, i think that if i had disabled background fsck (as i did now)
> i should have skipped the loss of these about ten emails...
IMHO this is something you need to solve no matter what. Failure of
a local delivery program shouldn't cause lost or bounced emails;
fixing this is usually just a matter of wrapping the program in
appropriate shell magic to return the "temporary failure" error
level (75 I think). For instance, when using postfix you can just
use the following:
mailbox_command = /your/local/script || exit 75
This way, even if the script fails running for *any* reason, postfix
will just requeue your email. Again, this is not postfix-specific
at all.
Bye,
Andrea
--
Press every key to continue.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050703154235.GB64535>