Jason L Tibbitts <email@example.com> writes:
>>>>>> S P Arif Sahari Wibowo <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> SPASW> That is a good question: Will majordomo exit with qmail-compliant
> SPASW> error codes?
> That's funny. qmail makes up random codes and folks then ask if other
> things are qmail compliant.
Well, at least qmail puts the exit codes in the man page and documents
> In any case, there is one provision made for qmail exit codes; mj_email
> will exit 99 on successful delivery if told to. (I'm not sure why,
Status 99 tells qmail to skip the rest of the .qmail file. It can be
useful if you have entries in .qmail-default after Majordomo and want them
to run only if Majordomo didn't want that mail message.
> Basically any email that gets to majordomo is a successful delivery from
> the standpoint of the MTA, so an exit code of zero is generally the only
> thing that makes sense. The issue can be revisited if some load-based
> cutoff scheme is cooked up (for the qmail equivalent of the standard
> EX_TEMPFAIL), but the queueing mode pretty much takes care of this issue
> as well.
command's exit codes are interpreted as follows: 0 means that the
delivery was successful; 99 means that the delivery was successful,
but that qmail-local should ignore all further delivery instructions;
100 means that the delivery failed permanently (hard error); 111
means that the delivery failed but should be tried again in a little
while (soft error).
Currently 64, 65, 70, 76, 77, 78, and 112 are considered hard errors,
and all other codes are considered soft errors, but command should
avoid relying on this.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>