qmail Digest 21 Apr 1999 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 617
Topics (messages 24488 through 24511):
POP3 Error
24488 by: "Jim Baxter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24492 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Minor problem with leaving messages on server
24489 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MICROSOFT'S HOTMAIL USES QMAIL!!!!
24490 by: "Barton Hodges" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24491 by: "Jay D. Dyson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24497 by: Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
.qmail Patch
24493 by: Andy Walden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Question about .qmail-user file
24494 by: Marcos Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24495 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24498 by: Marco Leeflang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail aliasing/virt users
24496 by: Marco Leeflang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Qmail Queue mounted via NFS?
24499 by: "Robert J. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24500 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24502 by: "Robert J. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24503 by: Mark Delany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24504 by: "Justin M. Streiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24505 by: "Justin M. Streiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
POP slow
24501 by: "Joel Golden (ICQ#5013149)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail anti-SPAM relaying support ???
24506 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
vacation
24507 by: Rob Genovesi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24509 by: "Peter Samuel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
AutoTURN and dynamic IP address
24508 by: Chris Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
any qmail-smtpd rewrites ?
24510 by: "x" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24511 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
->/var/adm/messages:
->Apr 20 07:34:47 arrowroot popper[7038]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -ERR
Unknown command: "uidl".
->Apr 20 07:34:47 arrowroot popper[7038]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -ERR
POP EOF received
The above is an error i keep getting on occasion.. does anyone know what it
is and how to fix it? I can't receive my mail as a result of this.
However, if i telnet into my account and run pine, then exit, everything
appears to fix itself.. HELP?!?!
Jim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jim Baxter writes:
> ->/var/adm/messages:
> ->Apr 20 07:34:47 arrowroot popper[7038]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -ERR
> Unknown command: "uidl".
> ->Apr 20 07:34:47 arrowroot popper[7038]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -ERR
> POP EOF received
>
> The above is an error i keep getting on occasion.. does anyone know what it
> is and how to fix it? I can't receive my mail as a result of this.
> However, if i telnet into my account and run pine, then exit, everything
> appears to fix itself.. HELP?!?!
Contact your ISP's Technical Support.
--
Sam
On Mon, 19 Apr 1999, Rick McMillin wrote:
> We're experiencing a minor problem with setting a mail client
> to leave messages on the server. It's not even really a problem,
> just something annoying.
I've seen this too. I believe that it has to do with clients losing track
of which messages they have downloaded, as when the client corrupts it
database of message id's.
> Anyway, when a mail client is set to leave messages on the server,
> every once in a while, it will re-receive all of the messages causing
> there to be duplicates. When I first saw this problem myself, I was
> using Outlook Express 5.0 and thought that it was probably some
> bug in the software. However, I'm now hearing from others that
> they are having the same problem using other clients like Eudora.
>
> I've checked when this has happened and everything appears to
> be fine in the cur directory.
>
> Has anyone else seen anything like this?
>
> Rick McMillin
> Network Operations Center
> I-Land Internet Services
>
>
--
"Life is much too important to be taken seriously."
Thomas Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (613) 998-2836
Hmmm, this is interesting. Microsoft's Hotmail uses Qmail for
outgoing mail, but what does it use for incoming mail? All
of this is done on a Solaris box? Are there any Linux boxes
hidden in the corners of the "Hotmail-Headquarters"? Any
insight on this topic?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter van Dijk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 1999 2:58 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: MICROSOFT'S HOTMAIL USES QMAIL!!!!
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 20, 1999 at 07:18:13AM -0000, John Conover wrote:
> > Peter van Dijk writes:
> > > On Fri, Apr 16, 1999 at 11:30:57AM -0300, Juan Carlos
> Castro y Castro wrote:
> > > > I already knew (as everybody) that MS couldn't put NT
> to work properly
> > > > and uses Solaris to run HotMail. But this is new. Or
> not. Forgive me if
> > > > this is old news.
> > >
> > > We'll forgive you.
> > >
> >
> > Does anyone know if they are using it to host virtual domains, and
> > leave the "Delivered-To: ..." header in?
>
> That's two times no. Hotmail only uses qmail for _outgoing_ mail.
>
> Greetz, Peter
> --
> | 'He broke my heart, | Peter
> van Dijk |
> I broke his neck' |
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
> nognixz - As the sun | Hardbeat@ircnet -
> #cistron/#linux.nl |
> | Hardbeat@undernet -
> #groningen/#kinkfm/#vdh |
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, Barton Hodges wrote:
> Hmmm, this is interesting. Microsoft's Hotmail uses Qmail for outgoing
> mail, but what does it use for incoming mail? All of this is done on a
> Solaris box? Are there any Linux boxes hidden in the corners of the
> "Hotmail-Headquarters"? Any insight on this topic?
I don't know about Hotmail per se, but I do know one of the
Microsoft network specialists who actually set up linux.microsoft.com and
was running a flavor of Linux (RedHat, IIRC) under the Microsoft domain.
All was well until the press got ahold of the story and then all
heck broke loose and linux.microsoft.com was blown out of the sky faster
than a duck on the first day of hunting season.
- -Jay
( ______
)) .-- "There's always time for a good cup of coffee." --. >===<--.
C|~~| (>-- Jay D. Dyson -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --<) | = |-'
`--' `-- People who think NASA is fake view WWF as real. --' `-----'
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBNxya/82OVDpaKXD9AQG1YQQAujS2BFgyR0dXqLsOdT7755s0r9Avynnm
7PNma88m+xH5BuCF18K560ov0Q1UH2hiyQxnRvSWpgAi4r2GZQlLWNr3ccQUpbTn
XZp+Dj5KkQ1Bmjn4ePVRrmXIjFQlt3S5RwWtED8YJ1p9ibfPi7pn+D9e4pRG6s3d
vYnBDPLfYzc=
=1VOL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Barton Hodges wrote:
>
> Hmmm, this is interesting. Microsoft's Hotmail uses Qmail for
> outgoing mail, but what does it use for incoming mail? All
> of this is done on a Solaris box? Are there any Linux boxes
> hidden in the corners of the "Hotmail-Headquarters"? Any
> insight on this topic?
Hotmail runs FreeBSD for it's Webservers, not Linux:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/990419-000028.html
--
Andre Oppermann
CEO / Geschaeftsfuehrer
Internet Business Solutions Ltd. (AG)
Hardstrasse 235, 8005 Zurich, Switzerland
Fon +41 1 277 75 75 / Fax +41 1 277 75 77
http://www.pipeline.ch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Didn't someone say they had a patch to restrict .qmail users to a staff
file? If so, can you send it along please? Thank you.
-andy
Hi,
I have setup a qmail server and it works fine.
However, there is a big problem I can't figure it out. Please tell me your
suggestions:
I created a file .qmail-marcos.tang at /var/qmail/alias and hope that my
qmail will accept mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED] When I sent a message from
outside, I found the error message at /var/log/syslog. It is
============================== Start Logging here
======================================================
Apr 21 00:36:32 student qmail: 924626192.905650 starting delivery 323: msg
212178 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apr 21 00:36:32 student qmail: 924626192.905651 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
Apr 21 00:36:33 student qmail: 924626193.029219 delivery 323: failure:
Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/
============================== End Logging here
======================================================
If I change my .qmail file from .qmail-marcos.tang to .qmail-marcostang,
everything works fine.
^ (with a dot) ^ (without a dot)
So I wonder my qmail doesn't know how to handle an email address with a "dot" between.
Of course, I believe qmail should be able to handle it :)
Do you give me any ideasor hints such that my qmail server can receive any
email addresses such as
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks a lot.
Regards,
Marcos.
+ Marcos Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
| I created a file .qmail-marcos.tang
See FAQ #4.6.
- Harald
setup a file .qmail-marcos:tang and your problem is history
marco leeflang
Marcos Tang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have setup a qmail server and it works fine.
>
> However, there is a big problem I can't figure it out. Please tell me your
>suggestions:
>
> I created a file .qmail-marcos.tang at /var/qmail/alias and hope that my
>qmail will accept mails to [EMAIL PROTECTED] When I sent a message from
>outside, I found the error message at /var/log/syslog. It is
>
> ============================== Start Logging here
>======================================================
>
> Apr 21 00:36:32 student qmail: 924626192.905650 starting delivery 323: msg
>212178 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Apr 21 00:36:32 student qmail: 924626192.905651 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
> Apr 21 00:36:33 student qmail: 924626193.029219 delivery 323: failure:
>Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/
>
> ============================== End Logging here
>======================================================
>
> If I change my .qmail file from .qmail-marcos.tang to .qmail-marcostang,
>everything works fine.
> ^ (with a dot) ^ (without a
>dot)
> So I wonder my qmail doesn't know how to handle an email address with a "dot"
>between. Of course, I believe qmail should be able to handle it :)
>
> Do you give me any ideasor hints such that my qmail server can receive any
>email addresses such as
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Thanks a lot.
> Regards,
> Marcos.
>
>
ok, thanks
i just forget this little dot
marco
RaTao von J wrote:
> you must be forgeting the dot "." in the end of the file ;) read the docs
>
> On 19-Apr-99 Marco Leeflang wrote:
> > I have to setup a lot of full-name mail users.
> > example:
> > marco.leeflang > user leem
> > so i have made a file in /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-marco:leeflang with
> > leem in this file.
> > al works fine.
> > but now i have many files and want to setup these users in the assign
> > file.
> > all attempts still won't work.
> > When i run qmail-newu i get a syntax error message
> > what is the correct syntax in the assign file when i want the above user
> > syntax.
> >
> > marco leeflang
>
> ----------------------------------
> E-Mail: RaTao von J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Pager: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <-- !ACABOU!
> Date: 20-Apr-99 Time: 01:25:08
> ----------------------------------
Hello all,
Is it possible to have two machines accessing the same queue via NFS? After
looking at the Earthlink setup
(http://www.earthlink.net/about/papers/mailarch.html ) that was done with
Sendmail, it seems like this wouldn't be all that hard to do with Qmail.
Only thing is.. the queue would have to be accessible by multiple boxen at
the same time. Anyone have URLs to large Qmail installs?
-Jason
---
Robert J. Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.siscom.net
Looking to outsource news? http://www.newshosting.com
SISCOM Network Administration - President, SISCOM Inc.
Phone: 937-222-8150 FAX: 937-222-8153
+ "Robert J. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
| Is it possible to have two machines accessing the same queue via NFS?
No! Your single copy of qmail-send assumes it is the only entity
making any changes in the queue (with the exception of qmail-queue,
which does however follow a specific protocol for inserting new
messages). Break that assumption, and you're breaking qmail.
You should always have the queue on a local disk anyway, for
reliability as well as efficiency considerations.
- Harald
Harald,
If we are speaking about reliability.. what if the local machine croaks..
then anything in the queue (of that local machine) is lost.. that isn't
acceptable.
-j
---
Robert J. Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.siscom.net
Looking to outsource news? http://www.newshosting.com
SISCOM Network Administration - President, SISCOM Inc.
Phone: 937-222-8150 FAX: 937-222-8153
-----Original Message-----
From: Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, April 20, 1999 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: Qmail Queue mounted via NFS?
>+ "Robert J. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>| Is it possible to have two machines accessing the same queue via NFS?
>
>No! Your single copy of qmail-send assumes it is the only entity
>making any changes in the queue (with the exception of qmail-queue,
>which does however follow a specific protocol for inserting new
>messages). Break that assumption, and you're breaking qmail.
>
>You should always have the queue on a local disk anyway, for
>reliability as well as efficiency considerations.
>
>- Harald
>
At 04:04 PM Tuesday 4/20/99, Robert J. Adams wrote:
>Harald,
>
>If we are speaking about reliability.. what if the local machine croaks..
>then anything in the queue (of that local machine) is lost.. that isn't
>acceptable.
Correct. But that doesn't detract from Harold's point that you *will*
corrupt the queue if you run it over NFS and you will destroying the queue
if you have more than one qmail-send try and service that queue. qmail is
not designed to share the queue in this way.
If you want a reliable queue in the face of this sort of error, and you want
to use qmail, you *have* to put the queue on hot-swappable mirrored disks
for a start (you have considered disk failure as well I trust) and have a
standby system that you can hot-swap the disks into.
Regards.
>
>-j
>---
>Robert J. Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.siscom.net
>Looking to outsource news? http://www.newshosting.com
>SISCOM Network Administration - President, SISCOM Inc.
>Phone: 937-222-8150 FAX: 937-222-8153
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Tuesday, April 20, 1999 3:24 PM
>Subject: Re: Qmail Queue mounted via NFS?
>
>
>>+ "Robert J. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>| Is it possible to have two machines accessing the same queue via NFS?
>>
>>No! Your single copy of qmail-send assumes it is the only entity
>>making any changes in the queue (with the exception of qmail-queue,
>>which does however follow a specific protocol for inserting new
>>messages). Break that assumption, and you're breaking qmail.
>>
>>You should always have the queue on a local disk anyway, for
>>reliability as well as efficiency considerations.
>>
>>- Harald
>>
>
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, Harald Hanche-Olsen wrote:
> + "Robert J. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> | Is it possible to have two machines accessing the same queue via NFS?
>
> No! Your single copy of qmail-send assumes it is the only entity
> making any changes in the queue (with the exception of qmail-queue,
> which does however follow a specific protocol for inserting new
> messages). Break that assumption, and you're breaking qmail.
>
> You should always have the queue on a local disk anyway, for
> reliability as well as efficiency considerations.
Amen. You can use an NFS filestore for mail drops if you use Maildir, but
definitely not the queue. You'd run a very high risk of corrupting
messages in the queue if you NFS'd it across machines.
jms
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, Robert J. Adams wrote:
> If we are speaking about reliability.. what if the local machine croaks..
> then anything in the queue (of that local machine) is lost.. that isn't
> acceptable.
Not necessarily. If the queue disk wasn't blown out when the machine
croaked, then you can force a run of the queue when the machine comes back
up and you're in good shape.
That said, how would you distribute the queue across several machines,
performance and reliability questions aside? NFS won't do it, I'll tell
you that much.
What if your central server were to croak in the middle of injecting a
message into the queue (e.g. physically committing it to disk)? Same
rules apply... If your central server were to go down, none of the
machines could adequately function because they couldn't contact the host
machine to insert a message into the queue. That would actually detract
from reliability because your whole mail cluster would depend on having
one machine up and accessible at all times.
There are options for distributing filesystems using more than one central
server (Coda, Transarc's AFS/DFS, etc), but these are either not totally
production-ready, support only a very limited number of platforms, or
their performance in write-intensive applications such as a mail queue
isn't known.
I'll accept the gamble of having a separate queue on each machine rather
than one large centralized queue. An NFS mailstore, with RAID 0+1 queue
is acceptable for my needs.
jms
Trying this again...
Any ideas why sending mail would take an unusual amount of time? POP reacts quick
when receiving mail, but smpt seems extremely slow.
Running Redhat 5.1, Pentium 166 w/ 64 megs of ram, and it's slow even on a lan.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------
Download ICQ at http://www.icq.com
On Apr 19 1999, Erwann CORVELLEC wrote:
(...)
> - I run qmail as a standalone daemon
What?! How's that? You mean you run qmail-smtpd stand-alone? How?
> - The system is a Linux Debian one so it is using inetd, and to
> avoid incompatibilities with this distribution I don't want to use
> solutions that are not officialy supported...
>
> Is there another solution ???
If you are interested in being "loyal" to your distribution
(nice distribution, BTW :-) ), then you should look forward some
packages like ezmlm-src, qmail-src etc in your nearest Debian mirror,
in the contrib section. You'll have to have some development tools
installed (make, gcc, the library headers etc).
> I seriously consider to stop using qmail. As there are too many
> add-ons I find qmail has limited functionalities by its own: It is
> the second time I have a problem and I am getting disappointed... :(
C'mon, considering stopping using qmail just for that?
[]s, Roger...
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Rogerio Brito - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/
(still an) Ugrad. Comp. Science student - "Windows? Linux and X!"
Nectar homepage: http://www.linux.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/opeth/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Has anyone ever modified the vacation program to quote the body of the
original message in the autoreply message? This is very trivial to do in
concept, however things such as email attachments can cause obvious problems.
I'm using Peter Samuel's modified vacation for Qmail (thanks Peter!), I
just need a reliable way to remove attachments from the body before
including it in the reply.
Any suggestions?
Rob
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, Rob Genovesi wrote:
> Has anyone ever modified the vacation program to quote the body of the
> original message in the autoreply message? This is very trivial to do in
> concept, however things such as email attachments can cause obvious problems.
>
> I'm using Peter Samuel's modified vacation for Qmail (thanks Peter!), I
> just need a reliable way to remove attachments from the body before
> including it in the reply.
>
> Any suggestions?
Rather than heavily modify vacation, why not modify your .qmail entry thusly
| attachment_strip | vacation psamuel
attachment_strip is some program that will strip the attachments, and
then you can modify vacation to simply quote the body of the message.
Why you would want to do this remains a mystery to me.
PS Coding of attachment_strip is left as an exercise for the reader,
unless there are programs that already do the job. As a starting point
the mpack and emil packages could be useful. Attachment handling is
NOT a trivial task.
Regards
Peter
----------
Peter Samuel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Technical Consultant or at present:
Uniq Professional Services, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
a division of X-Direct Pty Ltd
Phone: +61 2 9206 3410 Fax: +61 2 9281 1301
"If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left"
Somewhere in internet land there is a Web Server called:
www.seaweedsoftware.com.au
The web server stuff is working fine.
I am trying to turn this server into mail server as well,
using qmail. I want to send and receive mail from a local
machine using Netscape Navigator's MUA. This has to be done
using an ISP's POP account. Navigator's preferences have
been set so that the incoming and outgoing mail
servers are <www.seaweedsoftware.com.au>. I have installed
qmail on the server as per the instructions (I had to use
<make config-fast www.seaweedsoftware.com.au> as <make config>
didn't work).
Starting with this basic setup I have realised that the mail server
must be able to support the POP client talking to it using the SMTP
and POP protocols. Thus from the servers section of the FAQ listing
at <ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/qmail.html> I have gone ahead
and implemented the following:
=============
How do I run qmail-smtpd under tcpserver?
inetd is barfing at high loads, cutting off
service for ten-minute stretches. I'd also
like better connection logging.
-------------
How do I allow selected clients to send
outgoing messages through my SMTP server?
qmail-smtpd is giving the error ``sorry,
that domain isn't in my list of allowed
rcpthosts (#5.7.1)'' for messages to any
domain not listed in
/var/qmail/control/rcpthosts.
-------------
How do I set up qmail-pop3d? My old POP
server works with mbox delivery; I'd like
to switch to maildir delivery.
=============
I have verified that I have probably done the above correctly
by sending some mail to an outside user from my local version
of netscape. Thus I'm happy with the sending/relaying/SMTP side
of things. Note that as my local IP address is allocated
dynamically I had to make things pretty open in the /etc/tcp.smtp
file. I have guessed that the local address I get assigned will
be in the range 210.8.*.
Now comes the part where I'm a bit stuck, the receiving/POP3/
serialmail/AutoTURN side of things. I am about to try and
implement (from the FAQ again):
=============
How do I send messages by SMTP to an
authorized dialup host when it makes
an SMTP connection? I've heard about
ETRN and AutoTURN.
=============
To do this you simply install serialmail and follow the instructions
given in the AUTOTURN text file. The trouble is that these
instructions are not really pertinent to my situation. This file
starts off:
-------------
Situation: You are big.isp. You have assigned a
static IP address, say 1.2.3.4, to a dialup customer.
The customer would like you to receive mail for
virt.dom and forward it to 1.2.3.4 whenever
1.2.3.4 makes an SMTP connection to mail.big.isp.
-------------
The first problem I have with this statement and the instructions
that follow it is that it assumes a static IP address which I do
not have. This IP address becomes hard coded into various file
names and their contents. The second problem, which is possibly
not a show-stopper at this stage, is that I want to test receiving
mail for cjmurphy.www.seaweedsoftware.com.au before I worry about
virtual domains and try to receive mail for
cjmurphy.seaweedsoftware.com.au.
Can anyone help with the first problem? Am I stuck? Do I need to
find an ISP that will give me a static IP address each time I
log in?
hi,
as far as i know qmail-smtpd can't be run as a deamon but from ident (or
similar djb's server)only.
since this is really unefficient..are there any patches to this ?
is qmail-smtpd considered clean of bugs ?
anyone have some real life experience Qmail, Sendmail or Zmailer, Netscape,
etc...
how many daily messages can they handle ?
i can't trust qmail efficency notes
stuff like 'Red Hat doing fine with qmail, 16MB 486/66, 70000 messages a
day'
doesn't sound too real, & it ain't: RH is running Sendmail.
+ "x" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
| as far as i know qmail-smtpd can't be run as a deamon but from ident
| (or similar djb's server)only.
Yep.
| since this is really unefficient..
Only on architectures where fork and exec are expensive, which as far
as I know is not the case for most modern unixes.
| are there any patches to this ?
I don't think so. Of course, you can run any smtpd that you wish,
once you teach it to talk to qmail-queue (which is quite simple). I
don't know if there are alternative smtpd's out there that are already
made to do this.
| is qmail-smtpd considered clean of bugs ?
Yes, but some of its features are occasionally hotly debated on this
list, for example its treatment of isolated linefeeds or the lack of
support for certain antispam features. (We don't really want to
restart these flamewars now. Please have a look in the list
archives.)
| i can't trust qmail efficency notes
| stuff like 'Red Hat doing fine with qmail, 16MB 486/66, 70000 messages a
| day'
| doesn't sound too real, & it ain't: RH is running Sendmail.
What do you mean? There are lots of RedHat systems out there running
qmail. So what if it comes equipped with sendmail as default?
- Harald
