Or do I have to do something special? Thanks, Jim. PS For some reason the list refuses to send email to my old address. If anyone knows what's up with that I'd like to know.
The reason I ask, is that f?r is still being replaced by fuer. Thanks, Jim. Jim wrote:> Or do I have to do something special? > > Thanks, > Jim. > > PS For some reason the list refuses to send email to my old address. If > anyone knows what's up with that I'd like to know. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xapian-discuss mailing list > Xapian-discuss@lists.xapian.org > http://lists.xapian.org/mailman/listinfo/xapian-discuss > >
On Sat, Dec 16, 2006 at 09:32:39AM -0500, Jim wrote:> Or do I have to do something special?It's "0.9.9" not "0.99", but anyway no it doesn't include the utf-8 patches. The utf-8 support will debut in 1.0. If you want it sooner, you can either use a snapshot from SVN trunk (wider testing would be very useful): http://www.oligarchy.co.uk/xapian/trunk/ Or use the gmane patches with 0.9.9: http://search.gmane.org/~xapian/> PS For some reason the list refuses to send email to my old address. If > anyone knows what's up with that I'd like to know.Looks like fayettedigital.com's MTA is the problem: $ nc fayettedigital.com 25 220-host5.miwebdns5.com ESMTP Exim 4.52 #1 Sat, 16 Dec 2006 13:37:47 -0500 220-We do not authorize the use of this system to transport unsolicited, 220 and/or bulk e-mail. HELO ixion.tartarus.org 250 host5.miwebdns5.com Hello ixion.tartarus.org [82.211.108.121] MAIL FROM:<olly@survex.com> 250 OK RCPT TO:<jim@fayettedigital.com> 451 Could not complete sender verify callout There's a pause of more than 10 seconds before the 451. Cheers, Olly
-----Original Message----- From: "Jim" <k4gvo@bellsouth.net> To: xapian-discuss@lists.xapian.org; "Jim" <k4gvo@bellsouth.net> Sent: 21/12/06 15:53 Subject: Re: [Xapian-discuss] Is utf-8 enabled on version 0.99?>> There's a pause of more than 10 seconds before the 451.)It looks like the mail server for survex.com (82.211.108.122) appears to )have some timeouts in place that close the SMTP connection. It also )appears to have a delay in the connection. When I attempt to connect to )the SMTP server at 82.211.108.122 I am connected, but it takes several )seconds before the server responds with the 220 response which tells our )server that the connection has been established. This interferes with )the sender verification process. 10 seconds is not an undue delay, especially as more servers implement verification on connectors. I think you are seeing the consequences of your server verification being overly stringent. By way of credentials I wrote and maintained the bulk emailer at ananova; most of the effort was spent on dealing efficiently with temporary failures. I think MX records for a domain existing where the MX hosts are also not blacklisted is the most stringent check you can expect to use. Even then,DNS failures due to intermittent routing problems and DOS attacks could all cause you to drop legitimate mail. Assuming things about the performance of other networks which might actually be able to receive mail is stretching hope beyond bounds and results in this type of thing. Having re-read this mail, it sounds awfully pompous. I apologise for that, it's not intentional. Sam