[postmaster@012.net.il: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed]

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

What does this message mean?  I get these almost every time I reply to
a message that came from the bug tracker.  How can I avoid this
nuisance?

While at that, another related question: why am I receiving 4 copies
of every message I send in response to a bug tracker message?  2 of
them are probably due to the fact that I'm subscribed to bug-gnu-emacs
and to emacs-pretest-bug (if I unsubscribe, will I miss some messages
posted by humans to those lists?).  But what about the other 2 copies?

------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:26:41 +0300 (IDT)
From: Internet Mail Delivery <postmaster@012.net.il>
Subject: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed
To: eliz@gnu.org


- --Boundary_(ID_q0t8duE2sK94IQv73Y6Jdg)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-language: en-US

This report relates to a message you sent with the following header fields:

  Message-id: <ulk0pd2jh.fsf@gnu.org>
  Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:04:02 +0300
  From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
  To: Markus Triska <markus.triska@gmx.at>
  Subject: Re: bug#496: 23.0.60; ispell-word becomes increasingly slower

Your message cannot be delivered to the following recipients:

  Recipient address: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com
  Reason: Remote SMTP server has rejected address
  Diagnostic code: smtp;550 5.1.1 <bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com>... User unknown
  Remote system: dns;linnode.donarmstrong.com (TCP|84.95.2.1|44144|64.62.190.156|25)


- --Boundary_(ID_q0t8duE2sK94IQv73Y6Jdg)
Content-type: message/delivery-status

Reporting-MTA: dns;i_mtaout1.012.net.il (tcp-daemon)

Original-recipient: rfc822;bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com
Final-recipient: rfc822;bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1 (Remote SMTP server has rejected address)
Remote-MTA: dns;linnode.donarmstrong.com (TCP|84.95.2.1|44144|64.62.190.156|25)
Diagnostic-code: smtp;550 5.1.1 <bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com>... User
 unknown

- --Boundary_(ID_q0t8duE2sK94IQv73Y6Jdg)
Content-type: message/rfc822

Return-path: <eliz@gnu.org>
Received: from tcp-daemon.i-mtaout1.012.net.il by i-mtaout1.012.net.il
 (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0K360054RIW9B700@i-mtaout1.012.net.il>; Sat,
 28 Jun 2008 18:26:41 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([80.230.31.196])
 by i-mtaout1.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08)
 with ESMTPA id <0K3600HE0IK8PTV0@i-mtaout1.012.net.il> for
 bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com; Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:19:21 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:04:02 +0300
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#496: 23.0.60; ispell-word becomes increasingly slower
In-reply-to: <m1abh5zzab.fsf@gmx.at>
To: Markus Triska <markus.triska@gmx.at>
Cc: 496@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org,
 bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <ulk0pd2jh.fsf@gnu.org>
X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il
References: <20080628002655.A4921924848@mt-computer.local>
 <uod5mc9gf.fsf@gnu.org> <m1abh5zzab.fsf@gmx.at>

> From: Markus Triska <markus.triska@gmx.at>
> Cc: 496@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org,
> 	bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 11:25:48 +0200
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> check for memory leaks in aspell, I did:
> >> 
> >>    $ while true; do echo "test"; done | aspell -a
> >> 
> >> and in this case, aspell's memory usage seems to stay constant.
> >
> > Garbage collection?
> 
> I've received a better test case from the Aspell maintainer: 
> 
>   ( while true; do echo '!'; echo "-"; echo "%"; echo "^test"; done ) | aspell -a
> 
> According to him, it is the constant switching of modes that is causing
> a problem. He notes:
> 
>    "I have narrowed down the problem code. Technically it is not a leak
>    as the code is still reachable (according to valgrind), which makes
>    it harder to fix. I will let you know."
> 
> It is thus more an Aspell problem, but if it cannot be fixed in Aspell,
> I will look whether the Emacs side of communication can be improved.

But your test.el shows a similar problem with Ispell.  So either
Aspell and Ispell share the same problem, or Emacs still has something
to do with the slowdown.

- --Boundary_(ID_q0t8duE2sK94IQv73Y6Jdg)--
------- End of forwarded message -------