David Bremner <david@tethera.net> writes:
Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> writes:
Thank you. I tested that DSN with current flufl.bounce and it is recognized as a temp failure for the reported address and that in turn should just be ignored by Mailman's bounce runner and not reported as unrecognized.
What version of Mailman core is this and what version of flufl.bounce?
Sorry, meant to reply on list with the rest of the details, but got distracted by making dinner. So it sounds like the problem is old versions of flufl.bounce.
This particular machine is running debian oldstable, so things are a bit out of date. mailman-core is 3.2.1 and flufl.bounce is 3.0. I'll look into upgrading at least flufl.bounce.
Oh. It's actually 3.0.1. Still not new enough, but 3 years newer.
d