[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Upgraded exmh has broken outgoing mail



I upgraded exmh yesterday.  Since that moment, all outgoing mail
bounces with a DNS lookup error, although nslookup shows the
domain exists.

Is there some interaction between exmh and sendmail that could cause
this?

Any suggestions, please?

Here is the bounce message with its headers:
==============================================
Received: from localhost (localhost)
	by linda.lfix.co.uk (8.9.1a/8.9.1/Debian/GNU) with internal id
NAA29035;
	Thu, 3 Dec 1998 13:46:12 GMT
Message-id: <199812031346.NAA29035@linda.lfix.co.uk>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
	boundary="NAA29035.912692772/linda.lfix.co.uk"
Auto-submitted: auto-generated (failure)
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 13:46:12 GMT
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON>
To: <olly@linda.lfix.co.uk>
Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown (Name server: mail.enterprise.net.:
host not found)

1.	
The original message was received at Thu, 3 Dec 1998 13:45:53 GMT
from olly@localhost [127.0.0.1]

   ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
<mlpw@hotmail.com>

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 <mlpw@hotmail.com>... Host unknown (Name server:
mail.enterprise.net.: host not found)2.	
Reporting-MTA: dns; linda.lfix.co.uk
Received-From-MTA: DNS; localhost
Arrival-Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 13:45:53 GMT

Final-Recipient: RFC822; mlpw@hotmail.com
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.2
Remote-MTA: DNS; mail.enterprise.net
Last-Attempt-Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 13:46:12 GMT
==============================================
-- 
Oliver Elphick                                Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight                              http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
               PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1
                 ========================================
     "What shall we then say to these things? If God be for 
      us, who can be against us?"              Romans 8:31


Reply to: