fetchmail+exim broke for no reason?
Hi all,
Yesterday my fetchmail+exim setup to retrieve mail from my pop3 server
was workign
without a hitch. Today I dialup and now fetchmail will not download my
mail. I
have not changed a thing! Below is the transaction between the two
machines. Can
anybody shed any light on what is going on? I can use netscape to
retrieve the
mail without any complaints. But I don't use netscape for mail(except
for now when
my normal setup is broken, =) ).
Info:
pop3 server: postoffice.purdue.edu
my machine: brian.servis.net(local name, not a real dns/ip name)
fetchmail: POP3> RETR 1
fetchmail: POP3< +OK 3568 octets
fetchmail: reading message 1 of 132 (3568 bytes)
fetchmail: SMTP< 220 brian.servis.snet ESMTP Exim 1.92 #1 Wed, 19 Aug
1998 09:10
:52 -0500
fetchmail: SMTP> EHLO brian.servis.snet
fetchmail: SMTP< 250-brian.servis.snet Hello root at brian.servis.snet
[192.168.
1.1]
fetchmail: SMTP< 250-SIZE
fetchmail: SMTP< 250-PIPELINING
fetchmail: SMTP< 250 HELP
fetchmail: forwarding to brian.servis.snet
fetchmail: SMTP> MAIL FROM:<@postoffice.purdue.edu> SIZE=3568
fetchmail: SMTP< 501 <@postoffice.purdue.edu> : colon expected after
route
fetchmail: SMTP error: 501 <@postoffice.purdue.edu> : colon expected
after route
fetchmail: SMTP> MAIL FROM:<root> SIZE=3568
fetchmail: SMTP< 501 <root> : sender address must contain a domain
fetchmail: SMTP error: 501 <root> : sender address must contain a domain
fetchmail: POP3> QUIT
fetchmail: POP3< This is a MIME-encapsulated message
fetchmail: SMTP transaction error while fetching from
postoffice.purdue.edu
fetchmail: SMTP> QUIT
fetchmail: SMTP< 221 brian.servis.snet closing connection
fetchmail: sleeping at Wed Aug 19 09:10:52 1998
Thanks,
--
Brian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Never criticize anybody until you have walked a mile in their shoes,
because by that time you will be a mile away and have their shoes."
- unknown
Mechanical Engineering servis@purdue.edu
Purdue University http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/~servis
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: