Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #167685 > unrolled thread

mutt attachment error

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  mutt attachment error Haines Brown <haines@histomat.net> - 2016-05-10 17:10 +0200
    Re: mutt attachment error David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-05-10 17:30 +0200
      Re: mutt attachment error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-05-10 17:50 +0200
      Re: mutt attachment error Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2016-05-10 17:50 +0200
        Re: mutt attachment error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-05-10 18:10 +0200
          Re: mutt attachment error Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2016-05-10 20:00 +0200
            Re: mutt attachment error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-05-10 20:50 +0200
            Re: mutt attachment error Haines Brown <haines@histomat.net> - 2016-05-11 17:20 +0200
              Re: mutt attachment error Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2016-05-11 18:20 +0200
                Re: mutt attachment error <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-05-11 18:30 +0200
                  Re: mutt attachment error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-05-11 19:40 +0200
              Re: mutt attachment error Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-05-11 19:00 +0200
          Re: mutt attachment error Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com> - 2016-05-10 21:30 +0200
            Re: mutt attachment error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-05-10 21:50 +0200
              Re: mutt attachment error Mark Fletcher <mark27q1@gmail.com> - 2016-05-10 23:50 +0200
        Re: mutt attachment error David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-05-11 22:00 +0200
          Re: mutt attachment error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-05-12 12:40 +0200
            Exim and hostname --fqdn, was Re: mutt attachment error David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-05-12 17:20 +0200
              Re: Exim and hostname --fqdn, was Re: mutt attachment error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-05-12 21:40 +0200
                Re: Exim and hostname --fqdn, was Re: mutt attachment error David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-05-17 19:40 +0200
                  Re: Exim and hostname --fqdn, was Re: mutt attachment error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-05-18 01:10 +0200
    Re: mutt attachment error Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2016-05-10 20:10 +0200
      Re: mutt attachment error Haines Brown <haines@histomat.net> - 2016-05-13 13:20 +0200
        Re: mutt attachment error David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-05-13 15:40 +0200
          Re: mutt attachment error Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2016-05-13 15:50 +0200
        Re: mutt attachment error Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2016-05-13 15:50 +0200
        Re: mutt attachment error Ron Leach <ronleach@tesco.net> - 2016-05-13 19:10 +0200
        Re: mutt attachment error Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-05-13 19:10 +0200

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#167979 — Re: Exim and hostname --fqdn, was Re: mutt attachment error

On Tue 17 May 2016 at 12:32:33 -0500, David Wright wrote:

> On Thu 12 May 2016 at 20:38:41 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> 
> > For Exim and minimaldns the question is
> > 
> >   Does the hostname resolve to a fqdn (something with a dot in it)?
> > 
> >  127.0.1.1       alum.anything_you_want		alum
> > 
> > would do this.
> 
> I haven't worked out why exim needs hostname --fqdn to resolve to a
> dotty name. After all, it knows that your desktop.lan isn't really a
> routable internet address just by its IP number.

I'm not too sure being a routeable address is of significance to Exim.
If it isn't, I do not know why.

I'm going to stick with the advice to have a fqdn in /etc/hosts. It
works for me with Exim.

 http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-exim4-users/2008-April/001328.html

   I am very reluctant to give a "Unix administration course" in a
   warning printed by an arbitrary tool. This usually leads to people not
   reading the text because it's longer than two lines.

   The correct answer would of course be "have an FQDN in the 127.0.1.1
   line in /etc/hosts" for the majority of Debian systems.

 http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-exim4-users/2008-April/001326.html

   dc_minimaldns works by virtue of hardcoding the output of "hostname
   --fqdn" into the primary_hostname configuration option by
   update-exim4.conf, thus at package configuration time.
   update-exim4.conf silently does not set primary_hostname if hostname
   --fqdn's output does not at least contain one dot, effectively
   rendering dc_minimaldns invalid.

I think primary_hostname is at the root of this.

> > Having said this it as well to realise Exim will HELO to a remote host
> > with "alum.anything_you_want". Some misguided hosts will deny contact
> > because there is no reverse lookup which satisfies them. ISP smarthosts
> > are generally very forgiving (they have to be!) so this is generally not
> > a problem with sending mail through them.

> That issue is covered by setting helo_data, which has the advantage
> that it can be evaluated at the time it's used, so you can tailor it
> to each and every host you use.

Tried this in the past. It worked. Having no need for tailoring I
returned to using /etc/hosts for the HELO.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#167692

Haines Brown <haines@histomat.net> wrote:

> I tried to use mutt to send someone a zip file of about 50 Mb and got
> the error: "Error sending message, child exited 1 (). Could not send
> message."

> I assumed the attachment was too large and so went to
> /etc/exim4/conf.d/main/02*/ and altered the configuration to be:

>   # Message size limit. The default (used when MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT
>   # is unset) is 50 MB
>   .ifdef MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT
>   # message_size_limit = MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT # I commented this line
>   message_size_limit = 200 MB               # I added this line
>   .endif

> I restarted exim, but it had no effect. 

Of course it had no effect.

The code snippet above (before your edit) does the following:

If the Macro MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT is defined
  set the config option message_size_limit to the contents of MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT

What you did was

If the Macro MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT is defined
   set the config option message_size_limit to 200MB

Since MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT is normally undefined, the code does nothing in
both cases.

What you need to do is to revert you changes and define
MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT in a file called "/etc/exim4/exim4.conf.localmacros",
which will then get included in the autogenerated config file.

Please read /usr/share/doc/exim4/README.Debian.gz as everything is
documented in there. 

Grüße,
Sven.

-- 
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#167807

I'm still having no luck increasing maximum attachment size.

I create file: /etc/exim4/exim4.conf.localmacros
I leave it default permissions: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root
It has a single line: MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT = 200M
followed by CR.
And I restart exim: # invoke-rc.d exim4 reload

But:

 # exim -bP | grep size
  bounce_return_size_limit = 100K
  header_line_maxsize = 0
  header_maxsize = 1048576
  message_size_limit = 50M

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#167816

On Fri 13 May 2016 at 07:10:02 (-0400), Haines Brown wrote:
> I'm still having no luck increasing maximum attachment size.
> 
> I create file: /etc/exim4/exim4.conf.localmacros
> I leave it default permissions: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root
> It has a single line: MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT = 200M
> followed by CR.

That's all correct (for unsplit configurations) †.

> And I restart exim: # invoke-rc.d exim4 reload

But you haven't reconfigured exim yet. As I pointed out,
the Debian way to do that is:

# dpkg-reconfigure exim4-config

and that will *also* look after restarting exim in the
appropriate way for your system.

† I think it's good practice to put a comment line at the
end of the file. You wrote that you put a CR at the end,
but it's more likely to be a LF. Put a comment line, and
then you know (and can *see*) the problem is taken care of.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#167817

David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri 13 May 2016 at 07:10:02 (-0400), Haines Brown wrote:
>> I'm still having no luck increasing maximum attachment size.
>> 
>> I create file: /etc/exim4/exim4.conf.localmacros
>> I leave it default permissions: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root
>> It has a single line: MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT = 200M
>> followed by CR.

> That's all correct (for unsplit configurations) †.

>> And I restart exim: # invoke-rc.d exim4 reload

> But you haven't reconfigured exim yet. As I pointed out,
> the Debian way to do that is:

> # dpkg-reconfigure exim4-config

> and that will *also* look after restarting exim in the
> appropriate way for your system.

No need to do this. The init-script will regenerate the configuration on
every start, restart and reload.

S°

-- 
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#167819

Haines Brown <haines@histomat.net> wrote:

> I'm still having no luck increasing maximum attachment size.

> I create file: /etc/exim4/exim4.conf.localmacros
> I leave it default permissions: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root
> It has a single line: MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT = 200M
> followed by CR.
> And I restart exim: # invoke-rc.d exim4 reload

> But:

>  # exim -bP | grep size
>   bounce_return_size_limit = 100K
>   header_line_maxsize = 0
>   header_maxsize = 1048576
>   message_size_limit = 50M

Please post the first 20 lines of /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated.
Please also do a "ls -al /var/lib/exim4/" and "stat
/var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated" and post the results.

Grüße,
Sven.

-- 
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#167831

On 13/05/2016 12:10, Haines Brown wrote:
> I'm still having no luck increasing maximum attachment size.
>
> I create file: /etc/exim4/exim4.conf.localmacros
> I leave it default permissions: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root
> It has a single line: MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT = 200M
> followed by CR.

I am no expert on line endings, but I had thought, and this wikipedia 
site

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newline

suggests, that the line ending that *should* be used in Linux is
x 0A (LF line feed), not
x 0D (CR)

If your autogenerated file shows the MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT = 200M 
followed immediately by <##################> then the exim system 
(possibly) doesn't like the CR line ending.

[That was the advice given me on the debian-exim list earlier this 
month, where I had posted a similar question.  Brian has already 
mentioned that thread in an earlier message.]

Perhaps someone who knows for sure what the line-endings ought to be 
could chime in.

regards, Ron

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#167832

On Fri 13 May 2016 at 07:10:02 -0400, Haines Brown wrote:

> I'm still having no luck increasing maximum attachment size.
> 
> I create file: /etc/exim4/exim4.conf.localmacros
> I leave it default permissions: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root
> It has a single line: MESSAGE_SIZE_LIMIT = 200M
> followed by CR.
> And I restart exim: # invoke-rc.d exim4 reload
> 
> But:
> 
>  # exim -bP | grep size
>   bounce_return_size_limit = 100K
>   header_line_maxsize = 0
>   header_maxsize = 1048576
>   message_size_limit = 50M

It appears from another mail

  https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/05/msg00565.html

that you are *not* using Exim's non-split configuration. 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web