failure notice (fwd)

failure notice (fwd)

[Gerald Pfeifer]

This is when I just sent a test message to gccadmin@gcc.gnu.org. Is this
intended?? I didn't even know that we forward that.

Gerald

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: MAILER-DAEMON@sourceware.cygnus.com
To: pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at
Date: 9 Mar 2001 23:24:23 -0000
Subject: failure notice

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sourceware.cygnus.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<gcc@gcc.gnu.org>:
/  Mail note rejected:  List address must be in To: or Cc: headers.


--- Below this line is a copy of the message.

Return-Path: <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
Received: (qmail 7603 invoked by uid 9160); 9 Mar 2001 23:24:23 -0000
Delivered-To: gccadmin@gcc.gnu.org
To: <gccadmin@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Test
:

Re: failure notice (fwd)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Sat, Mar 10, 2001 at 12:26:12AM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>This is when I just sent a test message to gccadmin@gcc.gnu.org. Is this
>intended?? I didn't even know that we forward that.

I think I set this up.  The .qmail file in ~gccadmin is set up to forward
email to gcc@gcc.gnu.org.  I didn't realize that that would cause this kind
of problem.

I'm not sure what to do, here.  We do have to forward the email to
something.  We don't want "personal" email accumulating on gcc.gnu.org.

cgf

>Gerald
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: MAILER-DAEMON@sourceware.cygnus.com
>To: pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at
>Date: 9 Mar 2001 23:24:23 -0000
>Subject: failure notice
>
>Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sourceware.cygnus.com.
>I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
>This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
>
><gcc@gcc.gnu.org>:
>/  Mail note rejected:  List address must be in To: or Cc: headers.
>
>
>--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
>
>Return-Path: <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
>Received: (qmail 7603 invoked by uid 9160); 9 Mar 2001 23:24:23 -0000
>Delivered-To: gccadmin@gcc.gnu.org
>To: <gccadmin@gcc.gnu.org>
>Subject: Test
>:
>

-- 
cgf@cygnus.com                        Red Hat, Inc.
http://sources.redhat.com/            http://www.redhat.com/

Re: failure notice (fwd)

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> I'm not sure what to do, here.  We do have to forward the email to
> something.  We don't want "personal" email accumulating on gcc.gnu.org.

Can we circumvent this security measure easily, for this specific case?

  <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>:
    Mail note rejected:  List address must be in To: or Cc: headers.

If so, though, my feeling is that overseers@gcc.gnu.org might be a better
candidate for the forward than gcc@gcc.gnu.org. Unless we find a group of
volunteers that are taking care of this mail, that is.

Gerald
-- 
Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/

Re: failure notice (fwd)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Sat, Mar 10, 2001 at 08:54:30AM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> I'm not sure what to do, here.  We do have to forward the email to
>> something.  We don't want "personal" email accumulating on gcc.gnu.org.
>
>Can we circumvent this security measure easily, for this specific case?
>
>  <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>:
>    Mail note rejected:  List address must be in To: or Cc: headers.
>
>If so, though, my feeling is that overseers@gcc.gnu.org might be a better
>candidate for the forward than gcc@gcc.gnu.org. Unless we find a group of
>volunteers that are taking care of this mail, that is.

I can add gccadmin@gcc.gnu.org as an allowed address for gcc@gcc.gnu.org.

I don't think that overseers@gcc.gnu.org is the appropriate place to send
these, though.  I thought that the purpose of this account was to eliminate
the need for involving overseers.

We could set up a gccadmin mailing list or mail alias and let people join
it.  Would that be ok?

cgf

Re: failure notice (fwd)

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Sat, 10 Mar 2001, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> I can add gccadmin@gcc.gnu.org as an allowed address for gcc@gcc.gnu.org.
>
> I don't think that overseers@gcc.gnu.org is the appropriate place to send
> these, though.  I thought that the purpose of this account was to eliminate
> the need for involving overseers.

Good point.

> We could set up a gccadmin mailing list or mail alias and let people join
> it.  Would that be ok?

Well, perhaps let's start with gcc@gcc.gnu.org and then see how it
evolves?

Gerald
-- 
Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/

failure notice (fwd)

[Bernhard Rosenkraenzer]

Guess the mailing list spam filters are a bit too restrictive ATM - none
of the commit messages makes it through

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 30 Jul 2001 19:24:00 -0000
From: MAILER-DAEMON@sourceware.cygnus.com
To: bero@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: failure notice

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sourceware.cygnus.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<rhl-cvs@sources.redhat.com>:
ezmlm-reject: fatal: List address must be in To: or Cc: (#5.7.0)

--- Below this line is a copy of the message.

Return-Path: <bero@sourceware.cygnus.com>
Received: (qmail 415 invoked by uid 9181); 30 Jul 2001 19:23:56 -0000
Date: 30 Jul 2001 19:23:56 -0000
Message-ID: <20010730192356.408.qmail@sourceware.cygnus.com>
From: bero@sourceware.cygnus.com
To: rhl-cvs@sources.redhat.com
Subject: specspo/dist C.po dist.pot

CVSROOT:	/cvs/rhl
Module name:	specspo
Changes by:	bero@sources.redhat.com	2001-07-30 12:23:56

Modified files:
	dist           : C.po dist.pot

Log message:
	Add qt3 subpackages

Re: failure notice (fwd)

[Tom Tromey]

>>>>> "Bernhard" == Bernhard Rosenkraenzer <bero@redhat.de> writes:

Bernhard> Guess the mailing list spam filters are a bit too
Bernhard> restrictive ATM - none of the commit messages makes it
Bernhard> through

Thanks.  This was a buglet in the rhl-cvs `editor' file.
I believe I've fixed it.  If not, let me know and I'll try again.

Tom

failure notice (fwd)

[Joseph S. Myers]

Why is the spam blocking reporting a problem with an empty IP address?
What is the actual IP address in question it has a problem with?

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 19 Mar 2002 17:26:07 -0000
From: MAILER-DAEMON@sources.redhat.com
To: jsm28@srcf.ucam.org
Subject: failure notice

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sources.redhat.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<gcc@gcc.gnu.org>:
In an effort to cut down on our spam intake, we block email that is listed
by certain open-relay tracking services. Unfortunately you may have just
discovered the hard way that sometimes non-spam mail gets caught
accidentally.  In most cases you can clear this up by an upgrade to your
mail server or sometimes by getting an erroneous listing removed.
For more information about our use of these lists, see

      http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#rbls

The IP number that I'm denying mail from is
The list that you're on is http://spamcop.net/bl.shtml?.  See:

    http://spamcop.net/bl.shtml?

for more information about this list and why you are on it.

In the meantime, you can add yourself to the gcc.gnu.org
"global allow list" by sending email to:

    global-allow-subscribe-jsm28=srcf.ucam.org@gcc.gnu.org

This will enable you to send email without being subjected to
further spam blocking.

--- Below this line is a copy of the message.

Return-Path: <jsm28@srcf.ucam.org>
Received: (qmail 7991 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2002 17:25:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mauve.csi.cam.ac.uk) (131.111.8.38)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Mar 2002 17:25:29 -0000
Received: from student.cusu.cam.ac.uk
	([131.111.179.82] helo=kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk ident=mail)
	by mauve.csi.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1)
	id 16nNMV-00027g-00; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 17:25:27 +0000
Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost)
	by kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 16nNMS-0004xy-00; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 17:25:24 +0000
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 17:25:19 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk>
X-X-Sender:  <jsm28@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>
To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
cc:  <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: patch for -Wno-long-long and early GNAT compilers
In-Reply-To: <or663slgu2.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0203191718550.18265-100000@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: Joseph Myers <jsm28@srcf.ucam.org>

On 19 Mar 2002, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

> I can agree that this will be the end of the problem depending on the
> answer to my following question: how about 3.3?  Are we going to try
> to make at least some effort to keep GCC GNAT buildable with any
> earlier releases of GCC supporting GNAT (i.e., 3.1), or as soon as 3.2
> is out, patches will soon find their way into the CVS tree that break
> bootstraps that start from 3.1?

Further to this point: currently the C compiler required to build non-C
front ends when building a cross-compiler is 2.95 or later; C features
added in 3.0 or later mustn't be required by front ends.  Once 3.1
supporting Ada has been released; I think it's reasonable to require at
least 3.1 (as the first Ada-supporting GCC release) to build the Ada front
end in future releases - but we shouldn't move to a requirement of 3.2 as
a bootstrap compiler for Ada until we also think it reasonable for
building non-C front ends written in C.  This means not until compilers
based on 3.1 are no longer in widespread use.  (At present, 2.95 and
2.96-RH compilers are in widespread use for C, maybe more widespread than
3.0, and will continue to be in widespread use for some time.)  I think
the "Debian stable uses 3.2 as the default C compiler" test would be
reasonable.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk

Re: failure notice (fwd)

[Christopher Faylor]

On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 05:51:07PM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>Why is the spam blocking reporting a problem with an empty IP address?
>What is the actual IP address in question it has a problem with?

It's a bug in the header parsing in the new spam blocker apparently:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-03/msg01127.html

It must have been confused by the exim headers.

I've checked in a fix which should stop the check against the empty ip
address.  I'll check into making it properly parse the header next.

Sorry for the inconvenience.  Please let me know if you still are unable
to post.  I'll be watching the queue for this.  This one got by me.

cgf

>-- 
>Joseph S. Myers
>jsm28@cam.ac.uk
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: 19 Mar 2002 17:26:07 -0000
>From: MAILER-DAEMON@sources.redhat.com
>To: jsm28@srcf.ucam.org
>Subject: failure notice
>
>Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sources.redhat.com.
>I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
>This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
>
><gcc@gcc.gnu.org>:
>In an effort to cut down on our spam intake, we block email that is listed
>by certain open-relay tracking services. Unfortunately you may have just
>discovered the hard way that sometimes non-spam mail gets caught
>accidentally.  In most cases you can clear this up by an upgrade to your
>mail server or sometimes by getting an erroneous listing removed.
>For more information about our use of these lists, see
>
>      http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#rbls
>
>The IP number that I'm denying mail from is
>The list that you're on is http://spamcop.net/bl.shtml?.  See:
>
>    http://spamcop.net/bl.shtml?
>
>for more information about this list and why you are on it.
>
>In the meantime, you can add yourself to the gcc.gnu.org
>"global allow list" by sending email to:
>
>    global-allow-subscribe-jsm28=srcf.ucam.org@gcc.gnu.org
>
>This will enable you to send email without being subjected to
>further spam blocking.
>
>--- Below this line is a copy of the message.
>
>Return-Path: <jsm28@srcf.ucam.org>
>Received: (qmail 7991 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2002 17:25:29 -0000
>Received: from unknown (HELO mauve.csi.cam.ac.uk) (131.111.8.38)
>  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Mar 2002 17:25:29 -0000
>Received: from student.cusu.cam.ac.uk
>	([131.111.179.82] helo=kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk ident=mail)
>	by mauve.csi.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1)
>	id 16nNMV-00027g-00; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 17:25:27 +0000
>Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost)
>	by kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
>	id 16nNMS-0004xy-00; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 17:25:24 +0000
>Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 17:25:19 +0000 (GMT)
>From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk>
>X-X-Sender:  <jsm28@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>
>To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
>cc:  <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
>Subject: Re: patch for -Wno-long-long and early GNAT compilers
>In-Reply-To: <or663slgu2.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
>Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0203191718550.18265-100000@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>Sender: Joseph Myers <jsm28@srcf.ucam.org>
>
>On 19 Mar 2002, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
>> I can agree that this will be the end of the problem depending on the
>> answer to my following question: how about 3.3?  Are we going to try
>> to make at least some effort to keep GCC GNAT buildable with any
>> earlier releases of GCC supporting GNAT (i.e., 3.1), or as soon as 3.2
>> is out, patches will soon find their way into the CVS tree that break
>> bootstraps that start from 3.1?
>
>Further to this point: currently the C compiler required to build non-C
>front ends when building a cross-compiler is 2.95 or later; C features
>added in 3.0 or later mustn't be required by front ends.  Once 3.1
>supporting Ada has been released; I think it's reasonable to require at
>least 3.1 (as the first Ada-supporting GCC release) to build the Ada front
>end in future releases - but we shouldn't move to a requirement of 3.2 as
>a bootstrap compiler for Ada until we also think it reasonable for
>building non-C front ends written in C.  This means not until compilers
>based on 3.1 are no longer in widespread use.  (At present, 2.95 and
>2.96-RH compilers are in widespread use for C, maybe more widespread than
>3.0, and will continue to be in widespread use for some time.)  I think
>the "Debian stable uses 3.2 as the default C compiler" test would be
>reasonable.
>
>-- 
>Joseph S. Myers
>jsm28@cam.ac.uk

-- 
Please do not send me personal email with cygwin questions.
Use the resources at http://cygwin.com/ .

failure notice (fwd)

[Joseph S. Myers]

What and why do the spam checks think is wrong with the subject "Re: 3.2
PATCH: New install.info and install.dvi targets"?

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 3 May 2002 16:23:01 -0000
From: MAILER-DAEMON@sources.redhat.com
To: jsm28@srcf.ucam.org
Subject: failure notice

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sources.redhat.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>:
Sorry, something in your subject was flagged as indicative of spam.
Please change your subject and try again.
Contact gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org if you have questions about this. (#5.7.2)

--- Below this line is a copy of the message.

Return-Path: <jsm28@srcf.ucam.org>
Received: (qmail 9225 invoked from network); 3 May 2002 16:23:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO purple.csi.cam.ac.uk) (131.111.8.4)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 May 2002 16:23:00 -0000
Received: from student.cusu.cam.ac.uk
	([131.111.179.82] helo=kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk ident=mail)
	by purple.csi.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.04)
	id 173fpP-0007c7-00; Fri, 03 May 2002 17:22:39 +0100
Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost)
	by kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 173fpP-0004Jv-00; Fri, 03 May 2002 17:22:39 +0100
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 17:22:36 +0100 (BST)
From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk>
X-X-Sender:  <jsm28@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>
To: Rainer Orth <ro@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
cc:  <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: 3.2 PATCH: New install.info and install.dvi targets
In-Reply-To: <15570.47153.276107.546483@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0205031721190.16562-100000@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: Joseph Myers <jsm28@srcf.ucam.org>

On Fri, 3 May 2002, Rainer Orth wrote:

> 	* Makefile.in ($(docdir)/install.info): New target.
> 	(info): Depend on it.
> 	($(docdir)/install.dvi): New target.
> 	(dvi): Depend on it.

Info files need to be mentioned in .cvsignore.  Also, I think the name
change to gccinstall.info (both in the name built in the Makefile, and in
the @setfilename) should be done now in preparation for possible future
installation of the manual.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk

failure notice (fwd)

[Joseph S. Myers]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1714 bytes --]

I'm on the global-allow list (subscribed in October on the 
sources.redhat.com side, and subscribed again now on the gcc.gnu.org side 
when I received this message), but my message still gets rejected.  What 
is the problem?  (Original message attached, gzipped.)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers               http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
    jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
    joseph@codesourcery.com (CodeSourcery mail)
    jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 5 Apr 2005 23:45:17 -0000
From: MAILER-DAEMON@sourceware.org
To: joseph@codesourcery.com
Subject: failure notice

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sourceware.org.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>:
Sorry, something in your subject was flagged as indicative of spam.
See <http://sourceware.org/lists.html#sourceware-list-info> for mailing list
info for this site.
 
If you are not a "spammer", we apologize for the inconvenience.
You can add yourself to the gcc.gnu.org "global allow list"
by sending email *from*the*blocked*email*address* to:
  
    global-allow-subscribe-joseph=codesourcery.com@gcc.gnu.org
 
For certain types of blocks, this will enable you to send email without
being subjected to further spam blocking.  This will not allow you to
post to a list if you have been explicitly blocked, if you are posting
an off-topic message, if you are sending an attachment that looks like a
virus, etc.
 
Contact gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org if you have questions about this. (#5.7.2)

--- Enclosed are the original headers of the message.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: MESSAGE/RFC822, Size: 1238 bytes --]

Return-Path: <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Received: (qmail 9148 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2005 23:45:08 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.9)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 5 Apr 2005 23:45:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 15552 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2005 23:45:07 -0000
Received: from localhost (HELO digraph.polyomino.org.uk) (joseph@127.0.0.1)
  by mail.codesourcery.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 5 Apr 2005 23:45:07 -0000
Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost)
	by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.44)
	id 1DIxjF-0002Ci-GR; Tue, 05 Apr 2005 23:45:05 +0000
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 23:45:05 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
X-X-Sender: jsm28@digraph.polyomino.org.uk
To: Translation Project Robot <translation@iro.umontreal.ca>
cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: New Kinyarwanda PO file for `gcc'
In-Reply-To: <20050405135434.CBE2415E06A@bor.iro.umontreal.ca>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504052338100.3361@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
References: <20050405135434.CBE2415E06A@bor.iro.umontreal.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Content-length: 18

(Body suppressed)

From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
To: Translation Project Robot <translation@iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: New Kinyarwanda PO file for `gcc'
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 23:45:05 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504052338100.3361@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>

(Body suppressed)

[-- Attachment #3: Type: APPLICATION/octet-stream, Size: 984 bytes --]

Re: failure notice (fwd)

[Christopher Faylor]

[reply-to set]
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 11:55:39PM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>I'm on the global-allow list (subscribed in October on the
>sources.redhat.com side, and subscribed again now on the gcc.gnu.org
>side when I received this message), but my message still gets rejected.
>What is the problem?  (Original message attached, gzipped.)

I blocked the subject after the first ten or twenty of these messages.

cgf