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

Sandmail refuses connection on Sarge



I am building a mail server using a fresh Sarge installation in order
to replace my Woody box.
I have migrated my sendmail configuration files from the Woody machine
(sendmail 8.12.3) to the Sarge box (sendmail 8.13.2) manually.
Running 'sendmailconfig' seems okay, but I do not get any mail
delivered, not even locally.
Output from 'mailq' shows:

MSP Queue status...
                /var/spool/mqueue-client (8 requests)
-----Q-ID----- --Size-- -----Q-Time----- ------------Sender/Recipient-----------
j0U0pKV6024596       59 Sun Jan 30 01:51 erik
                 (Deferred: Connection refused by [127.0.0.1])
                                         erik
j0U0wbTa025351       59 Sun Jan 30 01:58 erik
                 (Deferred: Connection refused by [127.0.0.1])
                                         erik
j0U0MNsF022442       59 Sun Jan 30 01:22 erik
                 (Deferred: Connection refused by [127.0.0.1])
                                         erik
j0U0QfFD023134       59 Sun Jan 30 01:26 erik
                 (Deferred: Connection refused by [127.0.0.1])
                                         erik
j0U0UNI2024444       59 Sun Jan 30 01:30 erik
                 (Deferred: Connection refused by [127.0.0.1])
                                         erik
j0U0qSaY024635     4084 Sun Jan 30 01:52 sentto-3702311-55152-1107042289-erik=av
                 (Deferred: Connection refused by [127.0.0.1])
                                         erik@avondel.com
j0U08qt1021719       59 Sun Jan 30 01:08 erik
                 (Deferred: Connection refused by [127.0.0.1])
                                         erik
j0TNtfEW021590       59 Sun Jan 30 00:55 erik
                 (Deferred: Connection refused by [127.0.0.1])
                                         erik
                Total requests: 8

All connections are refused.
Any pointers to what I am missing here are much, much appreciated!

Erik



Reply to: