Re: Where is "local_domains" defined?
Hi Pal,
On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 11:09:39AM +0100, Pål Dahle wrote:
> Unfortunately I have managed to setup my mail system incorrectly
> and if I try to send mail to
>
> myself@somedomain
>
> the mail is delivered locally. This is not may intention. If
> I send emails to
>
> myself@otherdomain
>
> everything works fine. It seems therefore that somedomain
> is given in "local_domains", but I cannot figure out where
> "local_domains" is defined.
In /etc/exim/exim.conf, you find near the beginning:
######################################################################
# MAIN CONFIGURATION SETTINGS #
######################################################################
(...)
# Specify your local domains as a colon-separated list here. If this option
# is not set (i.e. not mentioned in the configuration file), the
# qualify_recipient value is used as the only local domain. If you do not want
# to do any local deliveries, uncomment the following line, but do not supply
# any data for it. This sets local_domains to an empty string, which is not
# the same as not mentioning it at all. An empty string specifies that there
# are no local domains; not setting it at all causes the default value (the
# setting of qualify_recipient) to be used.
local_domains = localhost:debian
>
> I would like the mail to appear as coming from somedomain and
> have therefore put somedomain in /etc/mailname. Is this
> what screws things up? I have tried to change /etc/mailname
> but this does not seem to help.
I think the sender address is determined by /etc/email-addresses,
but I don't think it has to do with your problem.
>
> I use exim4 and mutt.
>
> I have scanned all files in the /etc/exim4 directory tree for
> somedomain but there are no entries.
>
>
> Any suggestions?
>
>
> Cheers,
> Pål
BTW: I have exim3. Not sure about exim4.
Regards
--
Joachim Fahnenmüller
Debian Hint #21: If your Debian box is behind a slow network connection,
but you have access to a fast one as well, check out the apt-zip package.
Reply to: