qmail Digest 25 Mar 1999 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 590
Topics (messages 23350 through 23437):
keyserver
23350 by: Markus Stumpf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23351 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23352 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23353 by: Sameer Vijay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23372 by: "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23373 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23374 by: Mark Delany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23375 by: "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23382 by: "Chris Garrigues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23390 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23410 by: "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23414 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23424 by: "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23425 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23426 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23427 by: "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23428 by: Roger Merchberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23429 by: "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23430 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23431 by: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23432 by: Allen Versfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
RBL-Stats v1.0 Released
23354 by: xs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23362 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
23366 by: Joel Eriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23381 by: Robin Bowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23391 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
information need, please
23355 by: xs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Single user dialup - A SAGA
23356 by: RJP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23389 by: Robin Bowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
FW: GET ME OFF THIS DAMN LIST
23357 by: "Andrzej Kukula" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23359 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23360 by: "Roman V. Isaev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23361 by: Vern Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23364 by: "Julian L.C. Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23365 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23371 by: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
poor documentation example
23358 by: "Julian L.C. Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23369 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
23370 by: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23378 by: Kai MacTane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23383 by: Mark E Drummond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23387 by: Cris Daniluk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23388 by: "Racer X" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23398 by: Fabrice Scemama <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23399 by: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23403 by: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23412 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
23415 by: Cris Daniluk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23418 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
RBL(s)
23363 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
23368 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFC 2487 implementation in qmail (fwd)
23367 by: Jeff Hayward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[Q]
23376 by: "Pavel V. Piankov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23377 by: "Pavel V. Piankov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
dot-qmail security
23379 by: Richard Letts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23380 by: Stefan Paletta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
inject adds extra carriage returns
23384 by: Jeff Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23404 by: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X based mail client
23385 by: Cris Daniluk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Time Problem
23386 by: MountaiNet Tech Support <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23392 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
sendmail -bt ?
23393 by: Fred Leeflang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23405 by: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Aliases - silly newbie question but I can't figure it out
23394 by: Chris Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23396 by: Kai MacTane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23397 by: Robin Bowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23436 by: Chris Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
fixcr?
23395 by: Bill Luckett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23406 by: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23408 by: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Easy question (I hope!) tcpwrappers? tcpclient?
23400 by: Eric Shafto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23401 by: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23402 by: "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23407 by: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23409 by: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ETRN and Exchange
23411 by: Smurfette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23419 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23421 by: Smurfette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23422 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
list.cr.yp.to: Sorry,_I_couldn't_find_a_mail_exchanger_or_IP_address._(#5.4.4)/
23413 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23416 by: John Gonzalez/netMDC admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23435 by: "D. J. Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail, perl, and header rewrites
23417 by: Mahlon Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23420 by: Mahlon Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23423 by: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
O.T.(?): .fetchmailrc
23433 by: Enrico Mangano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23437 by: "Pavel V. Piankov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
docs
23434 by: "Adam D. McKenna" <[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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, Mar 24, 1999 at 09:10:35AM +0000, Les Klein wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I would like to know how/why the mailing list thinks that I sent this
> message (see the top line) when it was in fact sent by stefan loewe (who
> does not work here!!)
Come on folx ...
RTFH (Read the Fucking Header)
There ist no From: line in the eMail of the original sender.
What you get depends on your mail-client and which header fields
it uses then.
If it can't handle it correctly/as you like use a better MUA.
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | In a world without
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | walls and fences,
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | who needs
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | Windows and Gates?
Scott D. Yelich writes:
> The qmail-uce stuff is awesome. I can't wait to fileter some mail that
> way -- but the install assumes that I'm doing the qmail install from
> scratch -- and I already have it installed. Unless I missed it, it
> doesn't say whether or not the re-install over the current install won't
> harm anything. I'm going to try to install the qmail-smtp (or is it
> qmail-send?) manually. Wish me luck.
Please avoid instaling qmail-uce until you're more familiar with Qmail.
Thanks.
--
Sam
- Markus Stumpf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
| Come on folx ...
| RTFH (Read the Fucking Header)
Harumph! I wish sometimes that folks would catch up with the entire
thread before responding to the message that started it: This
particular horse is already good and dead, and flogging it further is
not helpful.
- Harald
hi!
Looking at the mailheaders I have ....
> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Mar 24
>13:58:26 1999
> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Received: from mail-rly.iitb.ac.in (mail-rly.iitb.ac.in [202.54.44.117])
> by cupid.che.iitb.ernet.in (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA04237
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 24 Mar 1999 13:58:26 +0530 (IST)
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Received: (qmail 20016 invoked from network); 24 Mar 1999 08:28:56 -0000
> Received: from muncher.math.uic.edu (131.193.178.181)
> by mail-rly.iitb.ac.in with SMTP; 24 Mar 1999 08:28:56 -0000
I see a 'From: ' line up there in the referred mail.(sub: keyserver)
I wonder who's resonsible for adding that line
qmail(mail-rly) or sendmail(cupid.che).
* Citing mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Markus Stumpf) -
* sent on Wed, Mar 24, 1999 at 01:32:16PM +0100 :
> There ist no From: line in the eMail of the original sender.
> What you get depends on your mail-client and which header fields
> it uses then.
> If it can't handle it correctly/as you like use a better MUA.
> \Maex
----- End quoted text. -----
--
Sameer Vijay - [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Research Engineer)
Dept. of Chemical Engg, IIT Bombay, Mumbai 400076 INDIA.
Fax: +91-22-5796895 (dept), +91-22-5783480 (IITB)
On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Sam wrote:
> Scott D. Yelich writes:
> > The qmail-uce stuff is awesome. I can't wait to fileter some mail that
> > way -- but the install assumes that I'm doing the qmail install from
> > scratch -- and I already have it installed. Unless I missed it, it
> > doesn't say whether or not the re-install over the current install won't
> > harm anything. I'm going to try to install the qmail-smtp (or is it
> > qmail-send?) manually. Wish me luck.
> Please avoid instaling qmail-uce until you're more familiar with Qmail.
> Thanks.
Huh?
Please refrain from learning how to drive until you're more
familiar with making gasoline? or more familiar with your
car's engine?
I thought qmail was supposed to be easy? or was that efficient?
The point here is that the way to learn about qmail is to futz with it.
I've received two email messages (one from Feb 1) that showed to run
rblsmtpd each time with a -r rbl-dns-server (instead of having one
rblsmtpd with multiple rbl servers). Where is that in the docs?
All I'm bitching about here people is piss poor and pathetic docs!
Everyone comes back and says RTFM and the docs are fine.
Here's the message from feb 1:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 09:43:17AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> }
> } Speaking of open relay blocking, is the appropriate way to use both
> } RBL and ORBS to invoke rblsmtpd twice? As in
> }
> } /usr/local/bin/tcpserver-qmail -pR -c50 -u70 -g70 \
> } -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \
> } 0 smtp /usr/bin/rblsmtpd -r relays.orbs.org -b /usr/bin/rblsmtpd \
> } -b /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3
> }
> } (I put ORBS first on the guess that it would block more connects).
>
> Yes, it is. It's documented that way somewhere, in fact.
If it is, in fact, documented "somewhere" -- I certainly can't
find it other than here and in a message I received from another
subscriber from this list.
Just for curiosity? How would you suggest learning more about qmail and
what would be your gauge as to when it would be appropriate for someone
who has installed qmail to be able to install the qmail-uce? It's really
too bad it's written in c++ and not in a more standard language.
Scott
Scott D. Yelich writes:
>
> On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Sam wrote:
>
> > Scott D. Yelich writes:
> > > The qmail-uce stuff is awesome. I can't wait to fileter some mail that
> > Please avoid instaling qmail-uce until you're more familiar with Qmail.
> > Thanks.
>
>
> Huh?
>
> Please refrain from learning how to drive until you're more
> familiar with making gasoline? or more familiar with your
> car's engine?
Actually, the right analogy would be: please refraing from learning how to
drive until you're more familiar with how to operate a gearshift. If you
don't know how to shift, you won't be able to drive.
> I thought qmail was supposed to be easy? or was that efficient?
Qmail != qmail-uce.
> All I'm bitching about here people is piss poor and pathetic docs!
So, write better documentation yourself. Show us how it's done.
> Everyone comes back and says RTFM and the docs are fine.
They are. So far, you have not showed any glaring omissions from the docs.
> Just for curiosity? How would you suggest learning more about qmail and
> what would be your gauge as to when it would be appropriate for someone
> who has installed qmail to be able to install the qmail-uce? It's really
> too bad it's written in c++ and not in a more standard language.
The qmail-uce patch is not written in C++.
That right there shows that you do not have a good grasp of what's going
on.
As far as suggestions go, I would suggest that you learn a little bit about
Unix in general, and how to compile and install software packages.
Furthermore, it won't hurt to learn a little bit about C programming
yourself (even C++).
--
Sam
>All I'm bitching about here people is piss poor and pathetic docs!
Right. We've heard you already. Now that we've heard you, why not quit the
bitching and do something useful?
Since no one on this list is paid to make the documentation better for you,
how do you propose that the doco improve?
If you can't think of anything, I have a suggestion.
As a token of your appreciation for all this free software you're using, why
not write some better docs when you're done learning and make then available
to the next "Scott" that comes along. That's probably a little more
productive than bitching into the wind and it's very much in the spirit of
free-to-net software, right?
And don't tell me you're not the right person. After all, you are just now
going thru precisely what every newcomer confronts. So you are in precisely
the best position to judge what needs better documentation.
It's a funny thing. I've been on this list since close to day one and 90% of
the people who bitch about something never bother to make it better and the
10% of the people who make it better, never bother to bitch. Time will tell
which group you've chosen to be in.
Regards.
> They are. So far, you have not showed any glaring omissions from the docs.
I thought I did in the last letter about rmbsmtpd -r. I have the same
question now as a poster from Feb 1. The only "docs" I had were the
mail that I saved at that time beccause I knew I would be comeing back
to it.
I came back to it and the mail gives me some insight -- but what is done
in the mail isn't documented anywhere. Oh, show me how it's done and
give me a reference to where multiple -r's is documented in the manual
and I promise I'll unsubscribe from this list and never say another word
to it.
> > Just for curiosity? How would you suggest learning more about qmail and
> > what would be your gauge as to when it would be appropriate for someone
> > who has installed qmail to be able to install the qmail-uce? It's really
> > too bad it's written in c++ and not in a more standard language.
> The qmail-uce patch is not written in C++.
*sigh* Perhaps it's possible to run the qmail-uce without the
dependencies that it has. Perhaps not. But, when I was installing
the dependencies for qmail-uce, I was told that my compiler didn't
create c++ files.
> That right there shows that you do not have a good grasp of what's going
> on.
You're so exactingly clever. You can't see the sun for the light.
> As far as suggestions go, I would suggest that you learn a little bit about
> Unix in general, and how to compile and install software packages.
> Furthermore, it won't hurt to learn a little bit about C programming
> yourself (even C++).
I drive a stick shift, by the way.
Sam, just for sh!ts and giggles, how long have you been writing
software? How long would you guess I have been (writing and compiling?)
Sam, guns don't kill people, bullets do, right?
I'm serious. One poster wrote me and said that you're prone to be
opinionated and capable of rather "rude" messages. That's fine with me
-- I can dish the crap right back. I guess this should be expected
in software now adays.
Scott
> From: "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 11:00:41 -0700 (MST)
>
> > They are. So far, you have not showed any glaring omissions from the doc
> s.
>
> I thought I did in the last letter about rmbsmtpd -r. I have the same
> question now as a poster from Feb 1. The only "docs" I had were the
> mail that I saved at that time beccause I knew I would be comeing back
> to it.
Actually, I have note that Sam's comment that "you have not showed any glaring
omissions from the docs" slightly misses the point since the problem with
Dan's documentation isn't that he doesn't cover everything. (In fact, he does
a very good job of covering everything.) The main problem (as has been
discussed in the past) is that he covers everything exactly once and if you
don't know where to look for something, it can be hard to find.
Having said that, I agree nearly 100% with Mark Delany's comments in a
separate message. For those who don't consider themselves programmers, the
most useful thing they can do to "pay" for their free software is to help with
documentation. Since you've identified some issues, please write up something
that can help future uses and make it available. Russell will almost
certainly put it on the web site, and if we're lucky, some form of your
document may make it into future versions of qmail itself. Until you write
something that can be used by other people, however, all you're doing is
generating heat with very little light.
Chris
--
Chris Garrigues Deep Eddy Internet Consulting
+1 512 432 4046 609 Deep Eddy Avenue O-
http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ Austin, TX 78703-4513
My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination. For an
explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html
Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft,
but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft.
PGP signature
Scott D. Yelich writes:
> I came back to it and the mail gives me some insight -- but what is done
> in the mail isn't documented anywhere. Oh, show me how it's done and
> give me a reference to where multiple -r's is documented in the manual
> and I promise I'll unsubscribe from this list and never say another word
> to it.
Please explain how you expect to find documentation for something that
doesn't exist. The last time I checked, rblsmtpd didn't seem to implement
multiple -r options, therefore I'm at a loss to understand how you expect
to document a non-existent fact.
rblsmtpd's docs describe rblsmtpd's functionality. Your problem is that
you did not realize that what you want is to chain multiple invocations of
rblsmtpd. You can argue that that's a rather stupid thing to do, but you
can't argue that something which doesn't exist isn't documented. Well,
duh...
> > > Just for curiosity? How would you suggest learning more about qmail > > > who
>has installed qmail to be able to install the qmail-uce? It's really
> > > too bad it's written in c++ and not in a more standard language.
> > The qmail-uce patch is not written in C++.
>
> *sigh* Perhaps it's possible to run the qmail-uce without the
> dependencies that it has. Perhaps not. But, when I was installing
> the dependencies for qmail-uce, I was told that my compiler didn't
> create c++ files.
I was almost afraid to ask what in blazes you are talking about, but I
think that I've finally figure it out.
What you are referring to as a 'dependency' is a separate package, but the
patch itself can be easily adapted to use any filtering engine, even
procmail, instead. In fact, I used to include instructions on using
procmail as an alternative, at some point in the fact. However, I felt
that procmail is rather broken in that regard, and was giving people a
nasty
headache.
> > Furthermore, it won't hurt to learn a little bit about C programming
> > yourself (even C++).
>
>
> I drive a stick shift, by the way.
>
> Sam, just for sh!ts and giggles, how long have you been writing
> software?
Eighteen years.
> How long would you guess I have been (writing and compiling?)
The thought never occured to me. I generally don't measure penis sizes
that way.
> Sam, guns don't kill people, bullets do, right?
On most days, yes.
> I'm serious. One poster wrote me and said that you're prone to be
> opinionated and capable of rather "rude" messages. That's fine with me
I'm hoping that someone else would also write and inform you that I'm not
known to be overly concerned about others' opinion of me.
--
Sam
On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Sam wrote:
> Scott D. Yelich writes:
> > I came back to it and the mail gives me some insight -- but what is done
> > in the mail isn't documented anywhere. Oh, show me how it's done and
> > give me a reference to where multiple -r's is documented in the manual
> > and I promise I'll unsubscribe from this list and never say another word
> > to it.
>
> Please explain how you expect to find documentation for something that
> doesn't exist. The last time I checked, rblsmtpd didn't seem to implement
> multiple -r options, therefore I'm at a loss to understand how you expect
> to document a non-existent fact.
Sorry, my statement was poorly phrased.
``Please give me a reference in the rblsmtpd package where the use of
more than one RBL lookup is used.''
I asked another poster on this list to give me an example of where else
in UNIX a program calls itself as a standard practice. He couldn't come
up with one. He provided a *working* example, but just because my car
can probably go 30 miles an hour BACKWARD, it doesn't mean that (1) I've
tested this or that (2) it was meant to. My opinion stands that a
program calling itself multiple times is *not* inherently intuitive and
it should be documented! The other example the poster gave was of a flow
control statement in the csh programming language (which was incorrect,
btw.).
> rblsmtpd's docs describe rblsmtpd's functionality. Your problem is that
> you did not realize that what you want is to chain multiple invocations of
> rblsmtpd. You can argue that that's a rather stupid thing to do, but you
> can't argue that something which doesn't exist isn't documented. Well,
> duh...
er, close. It wasn't the fact that I didn't know it could do that -- I
didn't realize that was how it was supposed to be done! I'm not going to
argue over multiple -rs or multiple instances now that I know it's
supposed to be multiple instances. I'll just wait for the next poor sap
that runs across this and I'll post ``I told you sos'' ...
> > > > Just for curiosity? How would you suggest learning more about qmail > > > who
>has installed qmail to be able to install the qmail-uce? It's really
> > > > too bad it's written in c++ and not in a more standard language.
> > > The qmail-uce patch is not written in C++.
> >
> > *sigh* Perhaps it's possible to run the qmail-uce without the
> > dependencies that it has. Perhaps not. But, when I was installing
> > the dependencies for qmail-uce, I was told that my compiler didn't
> > create c++ files.
>
> I was almost afraid to ask what in blazes you are talking about, but I
> think that I've finally figure it out.
>
> What you are referring to as a 'dependency' is a separate package, but the
> patch itself can be easily adapted to use any filtering engine, even
> procmail, instead. In fact, I used to include instructions on using
> procmail as an alternative, at some point in the fact. However, I felt
> that procmail is rather broken in that regard, and was giving people a
> nasty
> headache.
Right... but procmail gets bad-mouthed. maildrop is the prescribed
medicine... but we all know that one doesn't need c++ to get qmail-uce
going. nope.
Scott
Scott D. Yelich writes:
> Sorry, my statement was poorly phrased.
>
> ``Please give me a reference in the rblsmtpd package where the use of
> more than one RBL lookup is used.''
Why do you believe that there has to be an explicit documentation of this
situation? This is merely a specific application of rblsmtpd, all that the
documentation of any app should do, as a bare minimum, is to describe how
to run it, what its arguments are, and what it does. It would certainly be
nice to also have it describe to accomplish all sorts of weird results, but
that is certainly not a mandated requirement.
> I asked another poster on this list to give me an example of where else
> in UNIX a program calls itself as a standard practice. He couldn't come
> up with one. He provided a *working* example, but just because my car
It's called a "pipe", and it happens quite often, in a UNIX environment.
The first situation that comes to mind is a sophisticated grep that simply
won't cut it by running it once. As a rough example, consider grepping for
E-mail messages that pass through a badly misconfigured Sendmail 8.6 relay,
unless the header includes something that looks like an IP address:
grep 'SMI-8.6' * | egrep -v '[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+'
Not a perfect algorythm, but will do the job fine, in 99% of the cases, and
it makes no sense to waste a few hours to get it 100% right, if it's just a
one-time deal.
> er, close. It wasn't the fact that I didn't know it could do that -- I
> didn't realize that was how it was supposed to be done! I'm not going to
> argue over multiple -rs or multiple instances now that I know it's
> supposed to be multiple instances. I'll just wait for the next poor sap
> that runs across this and I'll post ``I told you sos'' ...
Actually, since whenever rblsmtpd was released, you're the first person to
get confused by it to such a degree as to initiate a long-running rant on
the subject. A few others asked how it can be done, and were more than
happy with the answer, which is no different than what happens with any
issue regarding any program.
> > I was almost afraid to ask what in blazes you are talking about, but I
> > think that I've finally figure it out.
> >
> > What you are referring to as a 'dependency' is a separate package, but the
> > patch itself can be easily adapted to use any filtering engine, even
> > procmail, instead. In fact, I used to include instructions on using
> > procmail as an alternative, at some point in the fact. However, I felt
> > that procmail is rather broken in that regard, and was giving people a
> > nasty
> > headache.
>
> Right... but procmail gets bad-mouthed. maildrop is the prescribed
> medicine... but we all know that one doesn't need c++ to get qmail-uce
> going. nope.
Correct. As long as you comply with the interface, you can plug in a
filtering engine written in Perl, for all I care.
--
Sam
> It's called a "pipe", and it happens quite often, in a UNIX environment.
> The first situation that comes to mind is a sophisticated grep that simply
> won't cut it by running it once. As a rough example, consider grepping for
> E-mail messages that pass through a badly misconfigured Sendmail 8.6 relay,
> unless the header includes something that looks like an IP address:
> grep 'SMI-8.6' * | egrep -v '[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+'
I would argue that the rblsmtpd calling itself is not a pipe.
execvp(*argv,argv);
doesn't look like a pipe to me. Gee, if the manual page
said that I had to use rblsmtpd with multiple *pipes*
to access different -r lookup sites, I'd be happy as well!
I'm sorry, but just listing all the options doesn't cut it when
the usage is non-standard, non-intuitive and downright difficult
to come to without a reference.
Look, I'm not the first to point this out and I won't be
the last asking this. One poster said I'm just part of the
problem unless I'm part of the solution. I can't modify your
source, but I'm glad to say that I *am* working on a web page
to reference all this.
> Not a perfect algorythm, but will do the job fine, in 99% of the cases, and
> it makes no sense to waste a few hours to get it 100% right, if it's just a
> one-time deal.
Ya know.... I just got back from a new consulting job. This place paid
someone several hundred dollars to install qmail and the person never
did get it working -- after several WEEKs of work. I'm sure you'll be
delighted to know that I have the job now.
> > er, close. It wasn't the fact that I didn't know it could do that -- I
> > didn't realize that was how it was supposed to be done! I'm not going to
> > argue over multiple -rs or multiple instances now that I know it's
> > supposed to be multiple instances. I'll just wait for the next poor sap
> > that runs across this and I'll post ``I told you sos'' ...
>
> Actually, since whenever rblsmtpd was released, you're the first person to
> get confused by it to such a degree as to initiate a long-running rant on
> the subject. A few others asked how it can be done, and were more than
> happy with the answer, which is no different than what happens with any
> issue regarding any program.
Huh? The answer given to me was RTFM! I read the FM. I was *still*
confused. Actually, one person from this liste send me a message
in a PRIVATE message with all that I needed to go. Those that posted
to the list just insisted that the documentation was sufficient
and told me to RTFM.
> > Right... but procmail gets bad-mouthed. maildrop is the prescribed
> > medicine... but we all know that one doesn't need c++ to get qmail-uce
> > going. nope.
> Correct. As long as you comply with the interface, you can plug in a
> filtering engine written in Perl, for all I care.
Now that's definitely an idea right there.
Scott
Scott D. Yelich writes:
> > It's called a "pipe", and it happens quite often, in a UNIX environment.
> > The first situation that comes to mind is a sophisticated grep that simply
> > won't cut it by running it once. As a rough example, consider grepping for
> > E-mail messages that pass through a badly misconfigured Sendmail 8.6 relay,
> > unless the header includes something that looks like an IP address:
> > grep 'SMI-8.6' * | egrep -v '[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.[0-9]+'
>
> I would argue that the rblsmtpd calling itself is not a pipe.
>
> execvp(*argv,argv);
>
> doesn't look like a pipe to me.
How do you think the shell handles the pipe symbol, genius?
Go back and retake UNIX 101.
> Look, I'm not the first to point this out and I won't be
Yes you are.
> the last asking this. One poster said I'm just part of the
> problem unless I'm part of the solution. I can't modify your
> source,
Actually, you can.
Well, you really can't, just like I can't do anything useful right now with
something written in Java.
But, setting that aside, there is no legal reason why you can't modify
those specific sources, or the documentation. If you did, and unless you
copyrighted them without redistribution rights, I could modify your mods
further, then may or may not integrate them with the original code.
> Ya know.... I just got back from a new consulting job. This place paid
> someone several hundred dollars to install qmail and the person never
> did get it working -- after several WEEKs of work. I'm sure you'll be
> delighted to know that I have the job now.
I don't see why I would or wouldn't.
--
Sam
From: Scott D. Yelich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Ya know.... I just got back from a new consulting job. This place paid
> someone several hundred dollars to install qmail and the person never
> did get it working -- after several WEEKs of work. I'm sure you'll be
> delighted to know that I have the job now.
Right, and just like everyone else who gets a job installing qmail, with no
prior experience, you come on the list and ask all sorts of newbie questions,
and then get upset when people tell you to read the documentation or FAQ
instead of giving you a quick answer.
I've been on this list for a little while now and although I've never actually
called rblsmtpd from itself, I've been well aware of the fact that it could be
done because I've seen people ask about it many times. The difference between
you and them is that when they asked, they asked politely, and when they were
told that the best solution was to install tcpserver, they did so instead of
insulting djb and half of the list.
The first time I encountered qmail, it was because a co-admin of a box I used
to admin had installed it in order to close our (then open) relay. I was very
frustrated at first. So I went to www.qmail.org and I read man pages for 3
hours. So when someone tells you to RTFM, it might not be because they're
trying to be hostile, but that RTFM'ing is really what you need to do in order
to start grasping the concepts that go along with this piece of radically
different software.
If you just want to run qmail as your MTA, then you can just install qmail and
run it under inetd, it will perform adequately. That's what I did at first.
But if you want a real *solution*, that maximizes performance, security, and
minimizes the strain on your system, then you will find that using an
all-djbware mail system (including tcpserver, supervise, setuser, accustamp,
cyclog, etc...) will save you a lot of headache in the long run.
--Adam
On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Adam D. McKenna wrote:
> From: Scott D. Yelich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Ya know.... I just got back from a new consulting job. This place paid
> > someone several hundred dollars to install qmail and the person never
> > did get it working -- after several WEEKs of work. I'm sure you'll be
> > delighted to know that I have the job now.
> Right, and just like everyone else who gets a job installing qmail, with no
> prior experience, you come on the list and ask all sorts of newbie questions,
> and then get upset when people tell you to read the documentation or FAQ
> instead of giving you a quick answer.
Are you like those creatures in the worm-hole on ds9?
I asked questions yesterday... I got the consulting today.
If you would like me to clarify that even more, let me know.
> The first time I encountered qmail, it was because a co-admin of a box I used
> to admin had installed it in order to close our (then open) relay. I was very
> frustrated at first. So I went to www.qmail.org and I read man pages for 3
> hours. So when someone tells you to RTFM, it might not be because they're
> trying to be hostile, but that RTFM'ing is really what you need to do in order
> to start grasping the concepts that go along with this piece of radically
> different software.
We've addressed this. What do you do when the FM isn't enough?
> If you just want to run qmail as your MTA, then you can just install qmail and
> run it under inetd, it will perform adequately. That's what I did at first.
> But if you want a real *solution*, that maximizes performance, security, and
> minimizes the strain on your system, then you will find that using an
> all-djbware mail system (including tcpserver, supervise, setuser, accustamp,
> cyclog, etc...) will save you a lot of headache in the long run.
I am seeing this.
when is djb coming out with his own unix? Also, what is part of qmail
and what isn't? Does anyone have a list of what is "official" and what
is not? does anyone care? anyone have a list of conflicting patches?
order of installation? I mean, where does it say I have to "back out of"
tcp-env to get tcpserver running? (answer; probably no where).
Ya, I'm moving to djbware... mostly because I want to be able to
support it when people ask me about it. But you know, sendmail *is*
easier... That's not an insult -- that's just an opinion based on the
amount of documentation that's available.
Scott
Once upon a midnight dreary, Scott D. Yelich had spoken clearly:
>Ya, I'm moving to djbware... mostly because I want to be able to
>support it when people ask me about it. But you know, sendmail *is*
>easier... That's not an insult -- that's just an opinion based on the
>amount of documentation that's available.
Sendmail is easier... Hmmmmm... for whom???
You??? Probably.
Me???? Not on your life.
Sendmail is the reason I switched to qmail... I once heard a reference to
the "ease of use" of Sendmail many, many moons ago... Sorry I cannot
remember the original author:
"The sendmail.cf file looks like an explosion at a punctuation factory."
By the time I figured out how to set up virtual domains (incorrectly - no
dox for it) in Suckmail, I started searching for something new in qmail.
Installed my first test server in under an hour, slightly longer to get it
right. Read docs for the next 2 weeks (and for those of you who were
b*tching about 1.03 dox; 0.96 were a *lot* more sparse), then put it into
production with less than 45 minutes downtime.
Er... and I got my Solaris admin job because I had OS/9 experience...
What little I couldn't figure out from the README's, I asked here on the
list... and I got a few RTFMAgain's, and some pointers, and *all* the
advice helped. (Tho, I never received the dreaded reply: "FAQ 5.4" :-)
My point for this tirade??? The dox may not be perfect, but they are
helpful if you read them, and read them, and read them again. Maybe I could
have been good with Suckmail with the right dox... trust me, tho; we'll
never know. ;^>
RTFM might sound rude to you... if it does, well, sorry... Just chalk it up
to a case of "sour medicine" and move on... maybe someday (after you've
been around for a few hundred requests) you'll just say "Go to
ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/rblsmtpd.html, download it, untar it and RTFM."
:-)
Chin up,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger --- sysadmin, Iceberg Computers
Recycling is good, right??? Ok, so I'll recycle an old .sig.
If at first you don't succeed, nuclear warhead
disarmament should *not* be your first career choice.
> Sendmail is easier... Hmmmmm... for whom???
> You??? Probably.
> Me???? Not on your life.
Just my opinion. I got sendmail 8.9.3 and ran the ./Build. I edited
the .mc like the readme/installs said and ran m4. Make install and I
was up and running. It it a single program, sendwhale, with a few side
programs -- but they're all in one package. It has multi-rbl, access
lists, etc., well documented with exact examples. *SURE* it's only one
possible use of the rule_set, right Sam, but it's right there, clear as
day. Sendwhale certainly has come a long way.
How many programs does qmail have? I've lost count... I have qmail,
ezmlm, dotforward, accustamp, cyclog, tcp-env, tcpserver, setuser,
rblsmtpd, qmail-pop3d, checkpassword, maildrop, qmail-popup, qmail-smtpd
(and all the other qmail- programs), and I'm sure I'm overlooking at
least a dozen more (or ones that I haven't even come across yet). You
have to figure out how to install each of these (fairly simple, even
with all the silly accounts that you have to create) and configure them
(very difficult), have c++ compilers, files and config files spread all
over the system (ie: default install).
Sure, it works... eventually... maybe. It might be efficient (as long
as you're not on a serial line?). I may be secure, as long as you don't
allow users to write .qmail files. It even comes default as an open
relay! Heck, even sendwhale changed that!
And, to top all of this off, the docs suck! I mean, it's not that qmail
is bad, really, it isn't! It's the docs. I asked someone to give me an
example of a standard unix program that called itself as part of its
normal/standard use. It couldn't be done... why? because there isn't
one, or if someone can dig up one, there certainly aren't a lot of them
to the point where that usage would not be confusing and non-intuitive.
You can find a doc on sendwhale to do just about anything you need.
It's well referenced, up to date.. and correct. It doesn't assume that
people are going to install AllmanOS just to get sendmail running. It
would say edit the conf-* files in *each* section, if it had to.
> Sendmail is the reason I switched to qmail... I once heard a reference to
> the "ease of use" of Sendmail many, many moons ago... Sorry I cannot
> remember the original author:
>
> "The sendmail.cf file looks like an explosion at a punctuation factory."
Besides, I can grok sendmail.cf -- I kinda like it. I have often
thought of writing an AI/Expert-System that uses many of its techniques.
> By the time I figured out how to set up virtual domains (incorrectly - no
> dox for it) in Suckmail, I started searching for something new in qmail.
> Installed my first test server in under an hour, slightly longer to get it
> right. Read docs for the next 2 weeks (and for those of you who were
> b*tching about 1.03 dox; 0.96 were a *lot* more sparse), then put it into
> production with less than 45 minutes downtime.
Thank goodness I wasn't around for .96 :->
> What little I couldn't figure out from the README's, I asked here on the
> list... and I got a few RTFMAgain's, and some pointers, and *all* the
> advice helped. (Tho, I never received the dreaded reply: "FAQ 5.4" :-)
Sheeit, I'd love someone to say ``it's in the FAQ'' -- but it's not!
You want a FAQ? Try installing ezmlm -- you're required to read
the FAQ just to figure out how to install the thing!
> My point for this tirade??? The dox may not be perfect, but they are
> helpful if you read them, and read them, and read them again. Maybe I could
> have been good with Suckmail with the right dox... trust me, tho; we'll
> never know. ;^>
heheh. I agree. qmail works -- it's just a battle to get to the point
where it is working and better docs would help this. Why am I whining
and not writing docs? Well, I *am* writing docs.
> RTFM might sound rude to you... if it does, well, sorry... Just chalk it up
> to a case of "sour medicine" and move on... maybe someday (after you've
> been around for a few hundred requests) you'll just say "Go to
> ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/rblsmtpd.html, download it, untar it and RTFM."
Actually, I thought about that. Every time someone comes on and
prefaces their question with: I've read the docs, but I couldn't find....
I'll just say: RTFM over and over like a mantra. RTFM. RTFM.
> Chin up,
> Roger "Merch" Merchberger
Oh, my chin is up. I actually kinda like qmail. I just don't like the
lack of docs. I haven't written docs for it because I felt that I
didn't know it enough to WRITE docs for it -- and those who do know it
don't feel they need to share.
Scott
ps: I'll post my page with qmail docs and source code soon.
Scott D. Yelich writes:
> Just my opinion. I got sendmail 8.9.3 and ran the ./Build. I edited
> the .mc like the readme/installs said and ran m4. Make install and I
> was up and running. It it a single program, sendwhale, with a few side
> programs -- but they're all in one package.
Sendmail is not a Unix program. It is an NT program that someone
ported to Unix twenty years ago. Unix programs use lots of little
executables and tie them together. Unix programs use pipes. Unix
programs make good use of the shell.
> How many programs does qmail have? I've lost count... I have qmail,
> ezmlm, dotforward, accustamp, cyclog, tcp-env, tcpserver, setuser,
> rblsmtpd, qmail-pop3d, checkpassword, maildrop, qmail-popup, qmail-smtpd
> (and all the other qmail- programs), and I'm sure I'm overlooking at
> least a dozen more (or ones that I haven't even come across yet).
Modularity is good.
> And, to top all of this off, the docs suck!
Buy the book in September.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.
Scott D Yelich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sure, it works... eventually... maybe. It might be efficient (as long
> as you're not on a serial line?). I may be secure, as long as you don't
> allow users to write .qmail files. It even comes default as an open
> relay!
That depends on your definition of default. If you follow the INSTALL
guide, you run ./config, which creates rcpthosts and turns off relaying.
> And, to top all of this off, the docs suck! I mean, it's not that qmail
> is bad, really, it isn't! It's the docs.
qmail has an excellent reference manual, but fairly poor step-by-step
guides, indexes, and tutorials.
> I asked someone to give me an example of a standard unix program that
> called itself as part of its normal/standard use.
Using multiple copies of rblsmtpd is basically equivalent to constructs
like:
grep word * | grep other | grep -v blah
which I use all the time. You're doing precisely that; it's just that
rblsmtpd has to do the "|" part for you rather than the shell because the
shell won't get the file descriptors right.
It's commonly called a tool chain here, and it's a style that djb uses
quite a bit (more than most program authors). It's a little confusing the
first time you see it, but the more you work with it the more you realize
how efficient and effective it is.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Mark Delany wrote:
>
> >All I'm bitching about here people is piss poor and pathetic docs!
>
> It's a funny thing. I've been on this list since close to day one and 90% of
> the people who bitch about something never bother to make it better and the
> 10% of the people who make it better, never bother to bitch. Time will tell
> which group you've chosen to be in.
>
> Regards.
Not too take sides or anything, but I would say that most of the slacker
90% you refer too aren't doing anything about it because they don't know
how...
Not everybody here is a programmer - When I find a problem, I can do no
more than report it as best I can. Isn't that the point of the mailing
list? Reporting bugs, and helping those less clueful?
(And yes, before anybody gets emotive on me, I am aware that you don't
need to program in order to write doc's)
--
Allen Versfeld
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wandata
All that glitters is not gold
All who wander are not lost
sorry i didn't include too much more information about this.
it's use is as follows:
./rblstats.sh log.file
(where log.file is where you have daemon logs (for rblsmtpd) going).
as for the awk problem, this was tested on a FreeBSD and Linux box, both
of which are using GNUawk (gawk). try replacing 'awk' with 'gawk' (if u
have it installed.) and try again. as for the ~ problem, try replacing the
~/ with a directory you can write to.
please excuse my ignorace, it's my first open source program attempt.
-xs
ps: anyone is welcome to hack this program as they feel needed, credit to
me or not, someone even sugested taht it use grep -c instead of wc -l, so
try that too. =)
end
-------------------------------------------------
Greg Albrecht Safari Internet
System Administrator Fort Lauderdale, FL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.safari.net
+1[888|954]537-9550
-------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Scott D. Yelich wrote:
>> hey all, here is a quickie little program i wrote to see exactly what
>> rblsmtp is doing for you, here is an example of the output:
>
>> #!/bin/sh
>> echo "RBL-Stats v1.0 by xs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"
>> echo ""
>> echo "checking your logfile, this'll take a few."
>> cat $1|grep rblsmtp > ~/.rbltmp.bak
>> echo "Since `head -1 ~/.rbltmp.bak|awk '{print $1" "$2" "$3}`"
>> echo "RBL has blocked `grep "com/cgi" ~/.rbltmp.bak|wc -l` connections."
>> echo "DUL has blocked `grep "com/dul" ~/.rbltmp.bak|wc -l` connections."
>> echo "DSSL has blocked `grep dssl ~/.rbltmp.bak|wc -l` connections."
>> echo "ORBS has blocked `grep orbs.org ~/.rbltmp.bak|wc -l` connections."
>> echo ""
>> echo "For a total of `grep rblsmtp ~/.rbltmp.bak|wc -l` connections
>> blocked."
>> echo "Great Hunt."
>> rm ~/.rbltmp.bak
>> #EOF
>
>Has anyone managed to get this to run?
>My /bin/sh doesn't do ~ expansion
>and the awk line appears tohave syntax errors with either the "
>or the ` or both.
>
>Scott
>
>
>
>
>
Pavel V. Piankov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 24 March 1999 at 14:43:47 +0300
>
> Hi,
> it looks like you have a very special Unix tho (:
> the scriptie worked fine for me.
>
> On Wed, Mar 24, 1999 at 12:48:25AM -0700, Scott D. Yelich wrote:
> > Has anyone managed to get this to run?
> > My /bin/sh doesn't do ~ expansion
> > and the awk line appears tohave syntax errors with either the "
> > or the ` or both.
The real Bourne shell does not do ~ expansion. Bash DOES do ~
expansion. Bash is commonly found as /bin/sh on Linux boxes, and I
hear on *BSD as well. So actually, the person writing the script had
the unusual Unix.
--
David Dyer-Bennet [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ddb.com/~ddb (photos, sf) Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ The Ouroboros Bookworms
Join the 20th century before it's too late!
On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Scott D. Yelich wrote:
> > > > rm ~/.rbltmp.bak
> > > Has anyone managed to get this to run?
> > > My /bin/sh doesn't do ~ expansion
> > > and the awk line appears tohave syntax errors with either the "
> > > or the ` or both.
> > Traditional bourne shells did not do tilde expansion. The newer sh that
> > comes with OS's like FreeBSD will do tilde expansion. It's best to use csh
> > for tilde expansion to maintain portability, or to explicitly use bash.
>
> Why not change "~" to /tmp/.rbls.$$ or /tmp/.rbls.$$.$USER or something
> and be done with limiting code? The echo with " inside the awk is
> also nasty. I'm not trying to critisize the programmer -- although
> it is amusing to see my "non standard standard solaris" system
> referenced again.
Have you ever heard about symlink-in-tmp problems?.. That is a classic mistake.
> Scott
/ Joel Eriksson
Joel Eriksson wrote:
>
> Have you ever heard about symlink-in-tmp problems?.. That is a classic mistake.
Erm, I haven't. Where would I read about such things, and other
"classic" mistakes?
R.
--
Two rules to success in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
-- Sassan Tat
Robin Bowes writes:
> Joel Eriksson wrote:
> >
> > Have you ever heard about symlink-in-tmp problems?.. That is a classic mistake.
>
> Erm, I haven't. Where would I read about such things, and other
> "classic" mistakes?
BUGTRAQ.
P.S. Your mail2news gateway is broken.
--
Sam
heres my answers, your milage may vary.
end
-------------------------------------------------
Greg Albrecht Safari Internet
System Administrator Fort Lauderdale, FL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.safari.net
+1[888|954]537-9550
-------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Scott D. Yelich wrote:
>
>
>Hello everyone. If you haven't already mail filtered me ...
>I'm looking for information on the following items -- any
>information would be appreciated:
>
>(1) What is the proper or "official" want to rbl with qmail? with
>tcp-env? with qmail itself? with tcpserver? and/or with with rblsmtpd? I
>have found docs on many of these systems, but not one says which is
>preferred or "officially" blessed. Right now I use tcpserver with
>rblsmtpd.
i would put my money on rblsmtp, but you'll have to wait on djb for that.
>
>(2) How can I make qmail not accept mail when a domain isn't given in
>the return address? How can I make qmail check the return address of the
>"mail from: part (and the helo part?) as well as the incoming connecting
>IP? Do I really want to do this? The reason is that I get a lot of mail
>forwarded through a lot of systems and the final system connecting to me
>is valid and not a relay or a spam site, but the email coming through
>is.
>
>(3) How can I get rblsmtpd to use multiple DNS "rbl" style maps such as
>ORBS, DUL, RBL and others?
easy, start another instance of rblsmtp inside itself, pointing at the
the next service, the manpage says how to use a different server, i don't
remeber exactly the sythax, something like: tcpserver rblsmtpd rblsmtpd
-pdul.maps.vix.com rblsmtpd -porbs.orbs.org
etc...
the server you use will depend on what services u use, check each services
homepage to see what is required to use it (rbl is rbl.maps.vix.com, dul
is dul.maps.vix.com) and so on.
>
>(4) Is there documentation that states that if you are going from
>tcp-env to tcpserver you have to convert your /etc/hosts.allow tcp-env
>RELAYCLIENT rules into tcpserver .cdb rules so that your smtp will still
>relay allowed clients?
yeah, theres a tidbit at the beginning of the qmail homepage that states
(how to allow selective relay) and it tells you how to compile the cdb
database.
>
>Thanks!
>
>Scott
>
>
>
lates.
Hi.
After a number of conversations through this list
(thanks for assistance so far BTW) I can now send external mail
as far as /var/qmail/alias/pppdir/new
I gather that mail is supposed to be delivered out of there
by using a command like:
maildirsmtp ~/alias/pppdir alias-ppp- sedric.demon.co.uk \
sedric.demon.co.uk
(this assuming that the command has been issued either by
user alias or by su alias -c maildirsmtp)
- seems a bit 'hacky' but there it is!
Issuing this command on-line produces no noticable effect.
After some excavation, I have:
1. Made another version of maildirsmtp called txmaildirsmtp which
runs a new version of maildirserial called txmaildirserial.
2. Made a new makefile in the serial source tree to produce the
new txmaildirserial program.
3. Altered the code of txmaildirserial.c (copied from maildirserial.c)
to include debug messages to the terminal.
>From the first trials of this little lot, I now know that
txmaildirserial is getting as far as seeing the Deliver-To: headers
in the 3 files that are 'stuck' in /var/qmail/alias/new
I am now going to try and find out what is supposed to happen
next...
This is going to take a good deal of time. I will do it if I have to,
because I am now determined to make qmail work one way or the other
regardless of what I have to hack in the process.
What does surprise me greatly is the extreme difficulty that I have
had so far in persuading qmail to perform what (should be) one of
the simplest tasks (and I suppose) the requirement of the vast majority
of users - mail delivery over a dial-up line to a remote ISP.
Since I am getting incoming mail and can use Netscape for news & html
update web pages with ftp etc. seems to me that the problem does
actually have to be with the qmail group.
If anyone in this list DOES use qmail-1.03 on Redhat linux 5.1
over a dial-up connection to demon,
I would be most interested to know exactly HOW they have done it!
--
RJP Personal..
Hi RJP,
I use Demon as my ISP and run qmail at home on RH5.2 using MW's source
rpms. I followed his instructions, and everything went really smoothly.
What problems are you having exactly?
R.
--
Two rules to success in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
-- Sassan Tat
On 24 Mar 99 at 11:21, Harald Hanche-Olsen wrote:
> It is perhaps time for a gentle reminder: Every message from the list
> contains the following header:
>
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
>
> Now, if a person were to send a message to that address a reply would
> come back explaining, among other things, how to get off the list.
> But I'll divulge the secret right here: Send an empty message to
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> and follow the instructions in the resulting reply. Enough said.
Maybe it would be better to append a short note at the end of each message
that comes from list. The note should say:
"If you want to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send an empty message
to [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Hardly everyone is familiar with the way ezmlm works (what a pity), so,
maybe it could help. The note might not be everlasting, e.g. when qmail
will have grown in popularity, it would be safe to remove the note.
Regards,
andrzej kukula
Andrzej Kukula writes:
> Maybe it would be better to append a short note at the end of each message
> that comes from list. The note should say:
>
> "If you want to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send an empty message
> to [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Noooooo!!!!!!! People who are ignorant enough to send mail to the
whole list are usually too ignorant to actually *read* the messages to
find out how to get off the list. It's just a waste of bandwidth and
screen space.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.
On 03/24, Russell Nelson wrote:
> > Maybe it would be better to append a short note at the end of each message
> > that comes from list. The note should say:
> >
> > "If you want to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send an empty message
> > to [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> Noooooo!!!!!!! People who are ignorant enough to send mail to the
> whole list are usually too ignorant to actually *read* the messages to
> find out how to get off the list. It's just a waste of bandwidth and
> screen space.
No, yes :) "Unsubsribe" footer works. Many people read whole messages,
but they don't know what "header" is. Most win#@%^$ users. They aren't
guilty, software hides all headers. When I added such footer to my mailing
lists, i've got a lot less "unsubscribe" screams.
OTOH, subscribing to _this_ list without knowing about headers is
kinda stupid tho...
--
Roman V. Isaev http://www.gunlab.com.ru Moscow, Russia
On 24 Mar 1999, Russell Nelson wrote:
>
> Noooooo!!!!!!! People who are ignorant enough to send mail to the
> whole list are usually too ignorant to actually *read* the messages to
> find out how to get off the list. It's just a waste of bandwidth and
> screen space.
This is true. I have a list of idiot^Wnon-technical people and adding a
two line footer with unscribe instructions had little effect.
My way around it was to implement a minimum message size (dir/msgsize)
and moderate any posts that ezmlm-reject rejects. (This required
rewinding stdin but wasn't too difficult.)
The -only- messages I've seen that have had a body less than one line
are unsubscription requests.
Cheers,
Vern
--
\ \ / __| _ \ \ | Vern Hart
\ \ / _| / . | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
\_/ ___|_|_\_|\_|
>Noooooo!!!!!!! People who are ignorant enough to send mail to the
>whole list are usually too ignorant to actually *read* the messages to
>find out how to get off the list. It's just a waste of bandwidth and
>screen space.
I don't mean to sound like a prick but what a silly argument. 1) A waste
of bandwidth? 2 additional lines is really not a waste of bandwidth. 2)
Screen space? 2 Lines (unless in 320x200) is not a lot of screen space -
either.
If having the text at the bottom removes even 1 Ignorant person from the
list, then it's worth it don't you think?
Regards,
Julian L.C. Brown
DNS Administrator
Interware.Net Inc.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.interware.net
From: Julian L.C. Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
:
: >Noooooo!!!!!!! People who are ignorant enough to send mail to the
: >whole list are usually too ignorant to actually *read* the messages to
: >find out how to get off the list. It's just a waste of bandwidth and
: >screen space.
:
: I don't mean to sound like a prick but what a silly argument. 1) A waste
: of bandwidth? 2 additional lines is really not a waste of bandwidth. 2)
: Screen space? 2 Lines (unless in 320x200) is not a lot of screen space -
: either.
it's not just 2 lines. It's 2 lines x # of subscribers x messages per day.
Assuming a "line" is 40 characters, there are 1000 subscribers, and 50
messages per day, that's 4 megabytes per day extra.
: If having the text at the bottom removes even 1 Ignorant person from the
: list, then it's worth it don't you think?
Yeah I'd agree with that. I'd maybe just put one line though.
--Adam
-
qmail mailing list - to unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 24 Mar 1999, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Andrzej Kukula writes:
> > Maybe it would be better to append a short note at the end of each message
> > that comes from list. The note should say:
> >
> > "If you want to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send an empty message
> > to [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>
> Noooooo!!!!!!! People who are ignorant enough to send mail to the
> whole list are usually too ignorant to actually *read* the messages to
> find out how to get off the list. It's just a waste of bandwidth and
> screen space.
No question about it. Previously I've posted examples from other lists
where they'll even quote the instructions.
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flame-mail: /dev/null
# include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
>That's all (I'm trying to say).
Whatever it is you are trying to say, take it to private message. I read
the qmail list for qmail oriented messages not nonsense.
Julian
>People miss my humor so much I sometimes think I'm not funny.
There might be a clue in there somewhere. :)
tq vm, (burley)
P.S. I'm at least half-kidding, as I often run into the same sort of thing.
On Wed, 24 Mar 1999, Julian L.C. Brown wrote:
>
> >That's all (I'm trying to say).
>
> Whatever it is you are trying to say, take it to private message. I read
> the qmail list for qmail oriented messages not nonsense.
>
> Julian
>
>
No need to copy me, Julian, I'm on the list.
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flame-mail: /dev/null
# include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
Text written by Scott D. Yelich at 07:02 PM 3/23/99 -0700:
>
>Regarding the wrapper -- yes, the wrapper is a decent idea. Then
>everyone would have to be educated (ie: forced?) to use that command and
>not an alternative such as npasswd, etc. Of course, the only way to
>do this would probably be to disable the old passwd (and wonder
>what that breaks). It's not all that simple, in the end.
I'm not familiar with npasswd and other alternatives. My solution would
have involved renaming passwd to something else (perhaps "passwd.orig"),
naming my wrapper "passwd", and simply having it validate arguments before
passing them on to passwd.orig.
I agree it's not that simple, but it's not necessarily that complex, either.
>Right. I prefer the idea of having decent documentation on things so
>that I don't have to read the author's mind.
I agree. I'm in the process of writing a few (very small) open-source
projects right now, and I'm keeping some of the things I've seen on this
list in the back of my mind as I write the docs.
I've also got a wonderful real-world case to observe: we've got a new
sysadmin here where I work, and after two or three months here, he's still
going "Where in the docs did you find that?" (For example, just yesterday,
we got spammed by someone in China, so I dropped their IP numbers into a
few tcpserver deny rules. Then I had to show him where in the docs to find
the info on that.) And this guy is not a newbie or a luser; he's an
experienced Unix/Linux sysadmin. He is, however, a Qmail newbie, and seeing
his reaction to the docs is causing me to want to make *really sure* that
my own documentation doesn't do that to people.
Which might result in my dumbing it down too much, but that's another problem.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kai MacTane
System Administrator
Online Partners.com, Inc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
>From the Jargon File: (v4.0.0, 25 Jul 1996)
fix /n.,v./
What one does when a problem has been reported too many times to
be ignored.
"Scott D. Yelich" wrote:
>
> How many people here had to ask or figure this out for
> themselves provided that they didn't have "cc" working?
I did. It was a quite fix but it was one which could have been avoided.
That's what autoconf & automake are for.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Mark E Drummond Royal Military College of Canada
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Computing Services
Linux Uber Alles perl || die
Racer X wrote:
> > Why not mention *this* in this INSTALL?
> >
> > How many people here had to ask or figure this out for
> > themselves provided that they didn't have "cc" working?
>
> Uh, you're kidding, right?
>
> I think the assumption is that you won't be messing around with compiling a
> new mail server (or anything else for that matter) from scratch if you
> can't even figure out your compiler. I've yet to find a stock system with
> development tools installed where "cc" didn't invoke the compiler.
>
> shag
Solaris? QNX? HPUX? AIX?
--
Cris Daniluk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------------
Digital Services Network, Inc. http://www.dsnet.net
1129 Niles-Cortland Road, Warren, Ohio 44484 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(330) 609-8624 ext. 20 Fax (330) 609-9990
The Web Hosting Specialists
-------------------------------------------------------------
> > Uh, you're kidding, right?
> >
> > I think the assumption is that you won't be messing around with
compiling a
> > new mail server (or anything else for that matter) from scratch if you
> > can't even figure out your compiler. I've yet to find a stock system
with
> > development tools installed where "cc" didn't invoke the compiler.
> >
> > shag
>
> Solaris? QNX? HPUX? AIX?
Thank you Cris, for illustrating one of the prime shortcomings of all
documentation ever printed - it can't force anyone to read, just as I can't
force you to read my message before you typed out a reply.
Should I have put "with development tools installed" in all caps?
I'm personally rather tired of this thread, as it seems to be mainly
between a) people who are too lazy to do a little research but evidently
have lots of energy to bitch, and b) people who have no sympathy for those
people in group "a." I apologize for continuing the thread but I felt this
message might illustrate to group "a" exactly WHY they get no sympathy.
shag
"Scott D. Yelich" wrote:
> This may not be the place to ask... and I'm not sure I'd like
> the answers -- but I'll ask anyway:
>
> (1) is it standard (practice) to link cc to gcc? (and who says it is
> standard practice?)
> and
> (2) how many people here have done this?
>
> As far as linking cc to gcc breaking things. I'll provide examples.
> Say, was the SunOS cc ansi compatible? I really do remember
> commany line options to cc that didn't work with gcc and
> vice-versa.
>
> Scott
Any Linux distribution has cc linked to gcc.
Concerning AIX: i sometimes use an AIX 3.2.5 old box, where
cc was present. This compiler is still doing a good job
(i've used it to compile perl 5.00502 for example). This box
was installed in '93.
Fabrice
On 24-Mar-99 Cris Daniluk wrote:
> Racer X wrote:
>
>> > Why not mention *this* in this INSTALL?
>> >
>> > How many people here had to ask or figure this out for
>> > themselves provided that they didn't have "cc" working?
>>
>> Uh, you're kidding, right?
>>
>> I think the assumption is that you won't be messing around with compiling a
>> new mail server (or anything else for that matter) from scratch if you
>> can't even figure out your compiler. I've yet to find a stock system with
>> development tools installed where "cc" didn't invoke the compiler.
>>
>> shag
>
> Solaris? QNX? HPUX? AIX?
HPUX comes with a crippled compiler. Has since at least v6 and I have
compiled qmail with it.
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flame-mail: /dev/null
# include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> No need to edit the Makefile to set the compiler option. As a feature of
> make you can pass the necessary parameters from the command line like
> so:- 'make CC=gcc' or whatever compiler is necessary. At no stage is it
> absolutely necessary to edit the make file.
Have you tried to do this with Dan's software? I don't believe it works
with his compile script. He doesn't use make to generate the compilation
lines.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
>Which might result in my dumbing it down too much, but that's another problem.
It's a risk worth taking. Think of the audience as reading at the
level of 5th-graders or so. That doesn't necessarily mean dumbing
it down. It does mean picking and using consistent terms for things,
writing clearly and concisely, and so on.
The audience for technical documentation, no matter *how* intellectually
advanced, includes very few people who actually *read* it at their
"advanced" level. The vast majority of readers instead dabble in it,
here and there, while focusing most of their (pertinent) mental activity
on *other* things, like the various jobs they're actually trying to
accomplish (which often only tangentially require figuring out how to
use some piece of software).
Avoiding dumbing it down is important, though, because advanced readers
might accidentally misinterpret dumbed-down writing. If you can't
see a way to bring up an important option, or facility, early on, while
keeping things clear, go ahead and *say* that, for example -- a footnote
or a parenthetical paragraph can let advanced readers know that, indeed,
Greater Things are afoot, without unduly confusing those who are
just begining to grapple with the topics presented.
I miss the days of my youth, when I actually had the time *and* the
inclination to read entire manuals on software over and over again,
until I'd nearly committed them to memory. That may be the best way to
learn about new products today. It probably is the best way to learn
about qmail, given the sort of documentation it has (which probably
has a very high "truth ratio", but certainly has much lower quality
as technical documentation than the software itself -- which doesn't
actually say much that's bad about the documentation).
But, the best way to *write* about new products today is to understand
that many readers will look at, say, a section, or even screenful,
of documentation every couple of days, and occasionally look up terms
in the index (following only one or two of the references), *at most*
during their initial attempts to use the product.
Such readers are best served by simplified roadmaps, which in turn
are backed up by clear, direct, and consistent chunks of documentation.
tq vm, (burley)
"Scott D. Yelich" wrote:
> On 23 Mar 1999, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > "Standard Solaris machine" is not the same thing as a "Standard UNIX
> > > machine". A standard UNIX machine comes with a functioning C compiler.
> > Solaris doesn't. HP-UX comes with something that's functioning only under
> > the most general possible definition of the term. I don't believe AIX
> > does. IRIX doesn't even come with header files, let alone a compiler.
> > Linux and *BSD come with functioning C compilers.
>
> This may not be the place to ask... and I'm not sure I'd like
> the answers -- but I'll ask anyway:
>
> (1) is it standard (practice) to link cc to gcc? (and who says it is
> standard practice?)
> and
> (2) how many people here have done this?
>
> As far as linking cc to gcc breaking things. I'll provide examples.
> Say, was the SunOS cc ansi compatible? I really do remember
> commany line options to cc that didn't work with gcc and
> vice-versa.
>
> Scott
It is "standard" practice to link cc to your DEFAULT compiler, not always gcc.
However, it often *isn't* done because many people assume cc is always gcc and
pass options to it that shouldn't be passed to it. For example, many egcs
command options are different, like you mentioned with SunOS cc.
I've adminned Solaris for years and I definitely don't have cc linked to gcc.
It causes headaches often, but I typically grep cc * ahead of time if no
autoconf is present... quickly replacing cc with gcc solves things but I must
agree with you, this is NOT the users responsibility to omnisciently know this.
It unquestionably sucks that things are the way they are, but whether you like
it or not, it is how it is. It's stupid. Yup. Can't change that. That's why
documentation is supposed to be detailed and cover things like this. There has
been a lot of stupid clout on this thread, but I think when you get back to
what started it all, it is very legitimate. The documentation might be best to
tell you to configure conf* to suit your needs and leave it at that. Only one
line, noone dies, and Scott's problem is solved...
--
Cris Daniluk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------------
Digital Services Network, Inc. http://www.dsnet.net
1129 Niles-Cortland Road, Warren, Ohio 44484 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(330) 609-8624 ext. 20 Fax (330) 609-9990
The Web Hosting Specialists
-------------------------------------------------------------
Cris Daniluk writes:
> I've adminned Solaris for years and I definitely don't have cc linked to gcc.
> It causes headaches often, but I typically grep cc * ahead of time if no
> autoconf is present... quickly replacing cc with gcc solves things but I must
> agree with you, this is NOT the users responsibility to omnisciently know this.
I must've been out of town when the job of installing a mail server has
been delegated to users. In the old days, it were the admins who did these
kinds of things.
You can argue that documentation for things that users run should be dumbed
down. rblsmtpd should not be installed by users.
--
Sam
Tim Tsai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 24 March 1999 at 03:18:37 -0600
> On Tue, Mar 23, 1999 at 07:55:05PM -0500, xs wrote:
> > as anyone had the pleasure of dealing with some of the (excuse the
> > language) ass pirates that refuse to fix their MTA(s) or work to get their
> > sites taken out of the ORBS, RBL, DSSL, or DUL databases?
>
> We haven't had these types of complaints yet, as we only use RBL and
> DUL on a site basis currently. I do use ORBS on my personal account in
> an advisory basis (mail goes to a separate folder not bounced) but I
> don't think I can enable it for our site. gte.net (which one of my
> friends use) and a few competitor ISP's are in ORBS and I don't want to
> lose e-mail coming from them.
It's easy to punch holes for specific sites. I've had to do a few
myself. I use tcpserver, so I just put this block in my cdb source
file:
# Override ORBS/RBL for a few hosts, at least for now
# The hockey.net domain, where TIES email comes from
209.98.94.1-8:allow,RBLSMTPD=""
# The University of Minnesota, poor people
160.94.5.41:allow,RBLSMTPD=""
128.101.131.42-43:allow,RBLSMTPD=""
# xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx home domain; seems spotty, but my tests showed this
167.142.225.1-6:allow,RBLSMTPD=""
By pre-setting the environment variable to a null string, I cause
rblsmtpd to not block.
--
David Dyer-Bennet [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ddb.com/~ddb (photos, sf) Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ The Ouroboros Bookworms
Join the 20th century before it's too late!
>anyway, thats what the BS in ORBS stands for, Behavor
>modification System.
I had an experience like this. I moved my email activity over to my
own LAN, using qmail, from my newly upgraded account with a "real" ISP,
using sendmail and fetchmail to do the ISP-related activity (via PPP
dial-up on my modem, etc.). That was a few months ago.
A month or so ago, my outgoing emails started getting rejected by a
set of mailing lists that are pretty much crucial to my daily work.
(These lists had been moved to a new machine specifically to allow
the host to accommodate existing customers, who might be on ORBS-listed
sites, while hosting these particular lists via qmail+ezmlm. I could
actually get email through via the old list addresses, which were
being maintained as forwarding addresses for a limited time.)
Turned out, my "real" ISP was ORBS-listed. I verified this myself
(hey, the bounce messages explained how to do it, pretty cool).
So, I contacted my ISP.
Their first few responses were along the lines of "ORBS is stupid, it
lists sites that aren't really open relays, pretty much everyone knows
this, so nobody should use ORBS listing alone just to block a site".
Having reviewed the material at the ORBS site, and not having enough
of a clue to really know who or what to trust, I told them, a couple
of times, that "well, it looks like your claim at least *was* right
at one time, but these days ORBS claims to be new, improved, and have
its act together, and the people maintaining these particular lists
are probably not entirely clueless -- consider reviewing ORBS and/or
contacting the postmaster at the mailing-list site, to learn about
whether ORBS might really have a point about your email relay".
A few days later, the problem was resolved: my ISP's site was delisted
at ORBS.
So, the problem (with ORBS, in this case) isn't necessarily a clueless
sysadmin, though it might be with a sysadmin who is so experienced
he remembers when ORBS was a bad thing. At least for me, it was
worth taking the time to patiently suggest that, perhaps, despite the
same old name, the new version was better.
Of course, the above lesson probably won't help when dealing with
people who think their relays must remain open, except in the sense
that, perhaps even with them, patient suggestions beat "you're a
clueless incompetent" on occasion. :)
tq vm, (burley)
FYI - I don't know if anything about this has appeared here.
-- Jeff Hayward
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 08:58:55 +0100 (MET)
From: Frederik Vermeulen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RFC 2487 implementation in qmail
Hello,
I would like to announce that I wrote some (experimental) code
implementing RFC 2487 (starttls) in qmail. Patches and some
documentation are at:
http://www.esat.kuleuven.ac.be/~vermeule/qmail/tls.patch
Regards,
Frederik Vermeulen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi,
recentrly I have asked for help to deal with spammers attack. and nobody
pointed me out to MrSam`s qmail-uce, it is capable of at least
cutting damage to bandwidth done by foged bounces by 2.
Here goes the [Q]: were is the official maildrop site.
Thanx for your time,
Pashah.
--
http://www.spb.sitek.net/~pashah/public-key-0x97739141.pgp
On Thu, Mar 25, 1999 at 12:45:40AM +0300, Pavel V. Piankov wrote:
> Here goes the [Q]: were is the official maildrop site.
OOps, sorry, I`ve found it.
Pashah.
--
http://www.spb.sitek.net/~pashah/public-key-0x97739141.pgp
On Sun, 14 Mar 1999, Joel Eriksson wrote:
> Is it possible to restrict dot-qmail capabilities for some users and
> allow it for others. I have not found any info on this in the FAQ /
> README / etc.
>
> The thing I'm worried about is the feature of pipe'ing the message to a
> command.
>
> If there is no standard way of doing it, I'll just hack the code of
> qmail-local a bit, but maybe some of you know of a better way?
sorry for the late reply, but the simplet answer is to modify PATH before
qmail starts so a different 'sh' is before /bin/sh in the PATH and then
add the checking to the replacement 'sh'.
RjL
Richard Letts wrote/schrieb/scribsit:
> sorry for the late reply, but the simplet answer is to modify PATH
> before
> qmail starts so a different 'sh' is before /bin/sh in the PATH and then
> add the checking to the replacement 'sh'.
qmail-local invokes "/bin/sh", not "sh", so this won't work without a
modification to the source, too.
Stefan
Using a 10K file (a newswire) formatted with a left margin and a short
right margin (68 characters), qmail-inject inserts extra carriage
returns. My message:
Ontario to Amend Industrial Standards Act Regulations
http://www.hronline.com/news/99/990318a.html
TORONTO -- The Ontario government has announced plans to amend
regulations under the Industrial Standards Act. The changes,
says Labour Minister Jim Flaherty, are intended to make business
more competitive and to create new jobs in the affected
industries.
Comes out:
Ontario to Amend Industrial Standards Act Regulations
http://www.hronline.com/news/99/990318a.html
TORONTO -- The Ontario government has announced plans to amend
regulations under the Industrial Standards Act. The changes,
says Labour Minister Jim Flaherty, are intended to make business
more competitive and to create new jobs in the affected
industries.
I've been away from the list for 2-1/2 months, but I can't find in the
archives or elsewhere any solutions for this. I'm trying to switch from
bulk_mailer because I'm getting messages rejected with "503 Need MAIL
before RCPT" and other erros.
Any suggestions appreciated.
Regards,
Jeff Hill.
--
********* HR On-Line: The Network for Workplace Issues ********
** Ph:416-604-7251 -- Fax:416-604-4708 ** http://www.hronline.com **
Jeff Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Using a 10K file (a newswire) formatted with a left margin and a short
> right margin (68 characters), qmail-inject inserts extra carriage
> returns.
I'm fairly certain this is not what's actually happening. What I'm
betting is actually happening is that your document has trailing
whitespace of some sort, either in the form of extra Ctrl-Ms or in the
form of whitespace padding out to the right "margin" and what you're
seeing is an interaction between that and your mail client. While
qmail-inject does some rewriting, it does very little, and I'm fairly
certain that it in and of itself without additional prompting won't create
this problem.
Check your source document for trailing whitespace and see; I could be
wrong, but it's a good place to start.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Attila Csosz wrote:
> Is there any X based mail client that supports the maildir format?
>
> Thanks
> Attila
Perhaps having the mail client interface via a localhost pop3 account
would give you more flexibility.
--
Cris Daniluk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------------
Digital Services Network, Inc. http://www.dsnet.net
1129 Niles-Cortland Road, Warren, Ohio 44484 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(330) 609-8624 ext. 20 Fax (330) 609-9990
The Web Hosting Specialists
-------------------------------------------------------------
This doesnt sound directly related to qmail, but if I send e-mail from a
Windows based e-mail program using my qmail server for SMTP, the time is
displayed properly when its checked on another Windows based e-mail client.
However, if I send directly off of my qmail server to a Windows based
e-mail client the time is about 5 hours ahead of the actual time. The time
and timezone are set correctly on the server. Any ideas?
MountaiNet Tech Support writes:
> This doesnt sound directly related to qmail, but if I send e-mail from a
> Windows based e-mail program using my qmail server for SMTP, the time is
> displayed properly when its checked on another Windows based e-mail client.
> However, if I send directly off of my qmail server to a Windows based
> e-mail client the time is about 5 hours ahead of the actual time. The time
> and timezone are set correctly on the server. Any ideas?
The Windows client displays the date in the message verbatim, without
adjusting it for the local timezone. Qmail generates GMT datestamps.
Whoever wrote the Windows client wasn't smart enough to correctly adjust to
translate the date/time of the message into the local timezone.
--
Sam
Hi,
I recently converted from using sendmail.
I'm now working on a system where I have
both majordomo and hypermail installed and
I'm experiencing some small problems with
figuring out which .qmail* file is being used
by qmail for few addresses.
Is there some sort of a sendmail -bt variant
for qmail which will show me for any address
what is the .qmail* expansion or so?
Thanks,
Fred
Fred Leeflang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there some sort of a sendmail -bt variant for qmail which will show
> me for any address what is the .qmail* expansion or so?
I'm afraid not, at least in the basic package. I seem to remember a few
people writing things like that as add-ons, though, so you may want to
check <URL:http://www.qmail.org/> and see if anything turns up there.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
This is a really trivial question but I can't figure it out at the
moment. I thus *do* have some sympathy with the recent postings about
the documentation.
I have qmail running on my RedHat 5.2 system and the basics work fine.
Mail is being delivered to all my users correctly and also mail to
postmaster, root and mailer-daemon works OK using the .qmail-xxx files
in /var/qmail/alias.
I also have a /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-default file so any badly or
incorrectly addressed mail gets to me. This is fine as I'm on a dial
up line, we are just four users and the level of badly addressed mail
is minimal.
However I now want to get mail addressed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
delivered to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I tried looking at the qmail
documentation and it just confused me I'm afraid. Should I be using
the /var/qmail/users/assign file describe in qmail-users (but I don't
have one at the moment). Should I be using the mechanisms described
in dot-qmail? *What* should I be using for a simple alias mechanism?
I have created a file .qmail-maxine.green in /var/qmail/alias with
just 'maxine' in it but that doesn't seem to work. It also seems a
rather clumsy mechanism if I wanted to create a lot of aliases. What
I would really like to do is arrange that all mail for (regex)
'.*maxine.*@isbd.demon.co.uk' would go to maxine, is there a simple
way to do this?
--
Chris Green ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.isbd.co.uk/
Text written by Chris Green at 11:15 PM 3/24/99 +0000:
>
>However I now want to get mail addressed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>delivered to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[snip]
>I have created a file .qmail-maxine.green in /var/qmail/alias with
>just 'maxine' in it but that doesn't seem to work.
[chris@isbd alias]# pwd
/var/qmail/alias
[chris@isbd alias]# mv .qmail-maxine.green .qmail-maxine:green
...should do it for you, although you might want to change the contents of
the file to "&maxine@localhost" or at least "&maxine".
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kai MacTane
System Administrator
Online Partners.com, Inc.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
>From the Jargon File: (v4.0.0, 25 Jul 1996)
firefighting /n./
1. What sysadmins have to do to correct sudden operational problems.
An opposite of hacking. "Been hacking your new newsreader?" "No, a
power glitch hosed the network and I spent the whole afternoon
fighting fires."
Chris Green wrote:
>
> However I now want to get mail addressed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> delivered to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I tried looking at the qmail
> documentation and it just confused me I'm afraid. Should I be using
> the /var/qmail/users/assign file describe in qmail-users (but I don't
> have one at the moment). Should I be using the mechanisms described
> in dot-qmail? *What* should I be using for a simple alias mechanism?
man qmail-users:
The file /var/qmail/users/assign assigns addresses to users. For
example,
=joe.shmoe:joe:503:78:/home/joe:::
says that mail for joe.shmoe should be delivered to user joe,
with uid 503 and gid 78, as specified
by /home/joe/.qmail.
So, in your example, you would use:
=maxine.green:maxine:xxx:yyy:/home/maxine:::
.
Where xxx is Maxine's user ID and yyy is her group ID. Don't forget the
"." on the last line. Also, don't forget to re-build the cdb with
qmail-newu.
> I have created a file .qmail-maxine.green in /var/qmail/alias with
> just 'maxine' in it but that doesn't seem to work. It also seems a
> rather clumsy mechanism if I wanted to create a lot of aliases.
man dot-qmail:
WARNING: For security, qmail-local replaces any dots in ext with
colons before checking .qmail-ext.
For convenience, qmail-local converts any uppercase letters in
ext to lowercase.
Try using .qmail-maxine:green instead.
> What I would really like to do is arrange that all mail for (regex)
> '.*maxine.*@isbd.demon.co.uk' would go to maxine, is there a simple
> way to do this?
I don't know.
R.
--
Two rules to success in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
-- Sassan Tat
On Wed, Mar 24, 1999 at 11:55:07PM +0000, Robin Bowes wrote:
> Chris Green wrote:
> >
> man qmail-users:
>
> The file /var/qmail/users/assign assigns addresses to users. For
> example,
>
> =joe.shmoe:joe:503:78:/home/joe:::
>
> says that mail for joe.shmoe should be delivered to user joe,
> with uid 503 and gid 78, as specified
> by /home/joe/.qmail.
>
> So, in your example, you would use:
>
> =maxine.green:maxine:xxx:yyy:/home/maxine:::
> .
>
> Where xxx is Maxine's user ID and yyy is her group ID. Don't forget the
> "." on the last line. Also, don't forget to re-build the cdb with
> qmail-newu.
>
> > I have created a file .qmail-maxine.green in /var/qmail/alias with
> > just 'maxine' in it but that doesn't seem to work. It also seems a
> > rather clumsy mechanism if I wanted to create a lot of aliases.
>
> man dot-qmail:
>
> WARNING: For security, qmail-local replaces any dots in ext with
> colons before checking .qmail-ext.
> For convenience, qmail-local converts any uppercase letters in
> ext to lowercase.
>
> Try using .qmail-maxine:green instead.
>
So that's qmail-users, qmail-newu and dot-qmail manual pages I have to
look at just to add a simple alias. Also there's still no guidance as
to *which* mechanism would be the normal way to do it.
Also, the qmail-users approach apparently doesn't replace the . with a :
whereas the other approach *does* replace the . with a :. I
realise this is all probably to do with the order in which the various
processes in qmail handle mail but it's not conducive to helping a
newcomer set things up.
While I am not a Unix newcomer (I have programmed on Unix systems
since the early 80s) I *am* a newcomer to managing a Unix mail system.
As I have said before there are now far more people likely to be doing
this sort of thing with the coming of small home networks running
Linux. A tutorial or some sort of introductory text for this sort of
user would be extremely useful.
--
Chris Green ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.isbd.co.uk/
Can anyone point me to some documentation on how to use fixcr. I've read
that "you can simply run sh -c 'fixcr | qmail-smtpd' for your outgoing mail
relay." but where do you put that command? In the startup script?
*************************************************************
Bill Luckett
Director of Information Systems
Phi Theta Kappa International Honor Society
Center for Excellence
Mississippi Education and Research Center
1625 Eastover Drive
Jackson, MS 39211
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
601.957.2241 ext 559
*************************************************************
Bill Luckett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can anyone point me to some documentation on how to use fixcr. I've read
> that "you can simply run sh -c 'fixcr | qmail-smtpd' for your outgoing
> mail relay." but where do you put that command? In the startup script?
It should go into the tool chain that you use to start qmail-smtpd. In
other words, if you currently start qmail-smtpd with:
tcpserver -v -R -u 91 -g 102 0 smtp qmail-smtpd 2>&1 \
| setuser qmaill /usr/local/bin/accustamp \
| setuser qmaill /usr/local/bin/cyclog /var/log/smtp &
You would instead use:
tcpserver -v -R -u 91 -g 102 0 smtp sh -c 'fixcr | qmail-smtpd' 2>&1 \
| setuser qmaill /usr/local/bin/accustamp \
| setuser qmaill /usr/local/bin/cyclog /var/log/smtp &
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bill Luckett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Can anyone point me to some documentation on how to use fixcr. I've
>> read that "you can simply run sh -c 'fixcr | qmail-smtpd' for your
>> outgoing mail relay." but where do you put that command? In the startup
>> script?
> It should go into the tool chain that you use to start qmail-smtpd. In
> other words, if you currently start qmail-smtpd with:
> tcpserver -v -R -u 91 -g 102 0 smtp qmail-smtpd 2>&1 \
> | setuser qmaill /usr/local/bin/accustamp \
> | setuser qmaill /usr/local/bin/cyclog /var/log/smtp &
> You would instead use:
> tcpserver -v -R -u 91 -g 102 0 smtp sh -c 'fixcr | qmail-smtpd' 2>&1 \
> | setuser qmaill /usr/local/bin/accustamp \
> | setuser qmaill /usr/local/bin/cyclog /var/log/smtp &
Sorry to follow up to myself, but I should add that while I haven't been
following the fixcr discussion that closely (it's not a problem that I
have to deal with), the note "outgoing mail relay" seems to me to imply
that you *don't* want to be running fixcr on arbitrary *incoming* e-mail.
So you may want to only do this on the qmail-smtpd you're running on a
special relay host or on a different port than smtp.
Caveat sysadmin.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
The examples given in the documentation are a little sparse and I was
hoping to find out the answer to this without going through the trial
and error process.
I want my server to work as an SMTP relay from machines within my
network. There are two solutions given for turning on relaying based on
the address of the client, one using tcpwrappers and one using
tcpclient. Will tcpwrappers allow me to specify a range of addresses as
it appears tcpclient will? Is one of these solutions generally easier,
simpler, more effective, more efficient, or more generally useful?
Thanks in advance!
On 25-Mar-99 Eric Shafto wrote:
> The examples given in the documentation are a little sparse and I was
> hoping to find out the answer to this without going through the trial
> and error process.
>
> I want my server to work as an SMTP relay from machines within my
> network. There are two solutions given for turning on relaying based on
> the address of the client, one using tcpwrappers and one using
> tcpclient. Will tcpwrappers allow me to specify a range of addresses as
> it appears tcpclient will? Is one of these solutions generally easier,
> simpler, more effective, more efficient, or more generally useful?
>
> Thanks in advance!
Actually it's tcpserver not tcpclient (but they're both in the same
package). tcpserver is the best way to go. You can specify ranges
of addresses too. And best of all, it has NOTHING to do with inetd.
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flame-mail: /dev/null
# include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
> On 25-Mar-99 Eric Shafto wrote:
> > The examples given in the documentation are a little sparse and I was
> > hoping to find out the answer to this without going through the trial
> > and error process.
:-/
> > tcpclient. Will tcpwrappers allow me to specify a range of addresses as
> > it appears tcpclient will? Is one of these solutions generally easier,
> > simpler, more effective, more efficient, or more generally useful?
> Actually it's tcpserver not tcpclient (but they're both in the same
> package). tcpserver is the best way to go. You can specify ranges
> of addresses too. And best of all, it has NOTHING to do with inetd.> >
what every happened to tcp-env?
Scott
Eric Shafto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I want my server to work as an SMTP relay from machines within my
> network. There are two solutions given for turning on relaying based on
> the address of the client, one using tcpwrappers and one using
> tcpclient. Will tcpwrappers allow me to specify a range of addresses as
> it appears tcpclient will?
Yes.
> Is one of these solutions generally easier, simpler, more effective,
> more efficient, or more generally useful?
Yes. Use tcpserver. It's much more robust and easier to work with once
you have it running.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Scott D Yelich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> what every happened to tcp-env?
tcp-env is only needed with inetd. tcpserver does everything that tcp-env
does automatically.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Having read the FAQ and some of the mailing list archives I can't find an
exact answer to my question so I'm hoping the people subscribed to this
list can either help or point me in the right direction. I am the sys
admin at an ISP running qmail under debian as the mail server, however we
have recently had several requests to support ETRN for M$ Exchange for
various customers who have semi-permanent connections to us with permanent
IPs. My questions are :
Are there any easier/better ways of doing this or will Exchange only do
ETRN ?
What is the simplest way to implement this ?(I'm very nervous about doing
_anything_ to a production machine which is relied on by all our users for
their email and mailing lists)
Thanks in advance
Meryki AK Horton
Smurfette writes:
> Having read the FAQ and some of the mailing list archives I can't find an
> exact answer to my question so I'm hoping the people subscribed to this
> list can either help or point me in the right direction. I am the sys
> admin at an ISP running qmail under debian as the mail server, however we
> have recently had several requests to support ETRN for M$ Exchange for
> various customers who have semi-permanent connections to us with permanent
> IPs. My questions are :
>
> Are there any easier/better ways of doing this or will Exchange only do
> ETRN ?
Use autoturn. It's in the latest serialmail (0.75) on koobera.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.
On 25 Mar 1999, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Smurfette writes:
> > Having read the FAQ and some of the mailing list archives I can't find an
> > exact answer to my question so I'm hoping the people subscribed to this
> > list can either help or point me in the right direction. I am the sys
> > admin at an ISP running qmail under debian as the mail server, however we
> > have recently had several requests to support ETRN for M$ Exchange for
> > various customers who have semi-permanent connections to us with permanent
> > IPs. My questions are :
> >
> > Are there any easier/better ways of doing this or will Exchange only do
> > ETRN ?
>
> Use autoturn. It's in the latest serialmail (0.75) on koobera.
Any tips, hints, pointers, warnings etc ? Have many people got qmail
working with Exchange ? I'm just trying not to reinvent the wheel here. If
I get any decent help I can summarise it and post it to the list or
something if anyone is interested.
Meryki AK Horton
**************************************************************************
* Meryki Amaryllis Keturah Horton | Your friends know you better in the *
* | first minute you meet than your *
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] | aquaintances will know you in a *
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] | thousand years. *
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] | *
* | Illusions, Richard Bach *
* www.nikita.is.creative.net.au | *
**************************************************************************
Smurfette writes:
> Any tips, hints, pointers, warnings etc ? Have many people got qmail
> working with Exchange ?
Oh, well, I'm using Anand's turnmail instead (because my customer
doesn't do static IPs), but the principle is the same. Works great
with Exchange. I know that my customer has at least two parties
happily using it.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | There is good evidence
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that freedom is the
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | cause of world peace.
21:42:24 ny qmail: 922329744.843066 starting delivery 583: msg 63539 to
remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mar 24 21:42:24 ny qmail: 922329744.843438 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20
Mar 24 21:42:35 ny qmail: 922329755.571427 delivery 583: failure:
Sorry,_I_couldn't_find_a_mail_exchanger_or_IP_address._(#5.4.4)/
Mar 24 21:42:35 ny qmail: 922329755.588673 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
WTF????
Let's go digging...
==================
;; QUERY SECTION:
;; list.cr.yp.to, type = MX, class = IN
;; ANSWER SECTION:
list.cr.yp.to. 23h59m28s IN MX 10 muncher.math.uic.edu.
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
yp.TO. 23h59m28s IN NS koobera.math.uic.edu.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
koobera.math.uic.edu. 29m18s IN A 131.193.178.247
No A record? Ok then...
;; QUERY SECTION:
;; muncher.math.uic.edu, type = A, class = IN
;; ANSWER SECTION:
muncher.math.uic.edu. 29m42s IN A 131.193.178.181
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN NS newton.math.UIC.EDU.
math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN NS raphael.math.UIC.EDU.
math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN NS uic-dns1.UIC.EDU.
math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN NS uic-dns4.UIC.EDU.
math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN NS uic-dns2.UIC.EDU.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
newton.math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN A 131.193.178.229
raphael.math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN A 131.193.178.198
uic-dns1.UIC.EDU. 1d19h50m3s IN A 128.248.2.50
uic-dns4.UIC.EDU. 2h59m IN A 128.248.3.53
uic-dns2.UIC.EDU. 1d19h50m3s IN A 128.248.7.50
Looks fine, so what happened?
Let's try this again...
;; list.cr.yp.to, type = MX, class = IN
;; ANSWER SECTION:
list.cr.yp.to. 23h58m34s IN MX 10 muncher.math.uic.edu.
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
yp.TO. 23h58m34s IN NS koobera.math.uic.edu.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
muncher.math.uic.edu. 29m6s IN A 131.193.178.181
koobera.math.uic.edu. 28m24s IN A 131.193.178.247
So the second time I'm getting an A record on the first query?
Interesting...
AHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[root@ny root]# dig @uic-dns4.UIC.EDU. muncher.math.uic.edu. a
; <<>> DiG 8.1 <<>> @uic-dns4.UIC.EDU. muncher.math.uic.edu. a
; (1 server found)
;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch
;; got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 10
This server is FUBARed. Someone, tell DJB.
--
Sam
Internic has been fucking up lately, i'm sure it has to do with them.
Probably a temporary root dns problem.. i've seen them putting domains on
hold for no apparent reason lately.
On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, Sam wrote:
-| 21:42:24 ny qmail: 922329744.843066 starting delivery 583: msg 63539 to
-| remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-| Mar 24 21:42:24 ny qmail: 922329744.843438 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20
-| Mar 24 21:42:35 ny qmail: 922329755.571427 delivery 583: failure:
-| Sorry,_I_couldn't_find_a_mail_exchanger_or_IP_address._(#5.4.4)/
-| Mar 24 21:42:35 ny qmail: 922329755.588673 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
-|
-| WTF????
-|
-| Let's go digging...
-|
-| ==================
-|
-| ;; QUERY SECTION:
-| ;; list.cr.yp.to, type = MX, class = IN
-|
-| ;; ANSWER SECTION:
-| list.cr.yp.to. 23h59m28s IN MX 10 muncher.math.uic.edu.
-|
-| ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
-| yp.TO. 23h59m28s IN NS koobera.math.uic.edu.
-|
-| ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
-| koobera.math.uic.edu. 29m18s IN A 131.193.178.247
-|
-| No A record? Ok then...
-|
-| ;; QUERY SECTION:
-| ;; muncher.math.uic.edu, type = A, class = IN
-|
-| ;; ANSWER SECTION:
-| muncher.math.uic.edu. 29m42s IN A 131.193.178.181
-|
-| ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
-| math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN NS newton.math.UIC.EDU.
-| math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN NS raphael.math.UIC.EDU.
-| math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN NS uic-dns1.UIC.EDU.
-| math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN NS uic-dns4.UIC.EDU.
-| math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN NS uic-dns2.UIC.EDU.
-|
-| ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
-| newton.math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN A 131.193.178.229
-| raphael.math.UIC.EDU. 29m42s IN A 131.193.178.198
-| uic-dns1.UIC.EDU. 1d19h50m3s IN A 128.248.2.50
-| uic-dns4.UIC.EDU. 2h59m IN A 128.248.3.53
-| uic-dns2.UIC.EDU. 1d19h50m3s IN A 128.248.7.50
-|
-|
-| Looks fine, so what happened?
-|
-| Let's try this again...
-|
-| ;; list.cr.yp.to, type = MX, class = IN
-|
-| ;; ANSWER SECTION:
-| list.cr.yp.to. 23h58m34s IN MX 10 muncher.math.uic.edu.
-|
-| ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
-| yp.TO. 23h58m34s IN NS koobera.math.uic.edu.
-|
-| ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
-| muncher.math.uic.edu. 29m6s IN A 131.193.178.181
-| koobera.math.uic.edu. 28m24s IN A 131.193.178.247
-|
-|
-| So the second time I'm getting an A record on the first query?
-|
-| Interesting...
-|
-| AHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-|
-| [root@ny root]# dig @uic-dns4.UIC.EDU. muncher.math.uic.edu. a
-|
-| ; <<>> DiG 8.1 <<>> @uic-dns4.UIC.EDU. muncher.math.uic.edu. a
-| ; (1 server found)
-| ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch
-| ;; got answer:
-| ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 10
-|
-|
-| This server is FUBARed. Someone, tell DJB.
-|
-| --
-| Sam
-|
_ __ _____ __ _________
______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Tech
__ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC!
_ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052
/_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com
[---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------]
9:15pm up 48 days, 3:55, 3 users, load average: 0.08, 0.12, 0.10
This appears to have been another UIC Computer Center fuckup. I wish the
math department were allowed to hire a competent ISP outside UIC.
The bad nameserver has been turned off now. If you received a bounce for
*.yp.to or *.math.uic.edu, try sending your message again.
---Dan
I am having a tough time stuffing a header into a message, and persuading
it to stay put in a reply.
I am currently under the assumption that it's the MUA that is stripping my
custom header away before blasting the message though.
However, other custom headers stay put.
.qmail file just pipes the message to the perl script.
perl script sucks it in, adds a header, and re-pipes it onward to
qmail-inject at a different address.
This parts works great. The problem: As soon as the message is replied
to (using pretty much any MUA under the sun), the header mysteriously
disappears. Perhaps I am writing it to the wrong spot?
Any help would be appreciated.
Perl source is below.
--------------------------------
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
open(QMAIL, "|/var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject (some different address)") || die
"Uh oh, can't open inject: $!\n";
# Start sucking in message, get headers.
while ($line = <STDIN>) {
if ($line =~ /^\n$/) {
last;
}
push(@HEADERS, $line);
}
# Add a header.
$HEADER = "X-CUSTOM-HEADER: blah blah blah\n";
push(@HEADERS, $TRACK_HEADER);
print QMAIL @HEADERS;
# Pump the rest of the message through.
print QMAIL "\n";
while ($line = <STDIN>) {
print QMAIL $line;
}
close QMAIL;
------------
Mahlon Smith
InternetCDS
541.773.9600
And of course, I catch a typo in my source _after_ I post to the list.
Should have read as such:
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
open(QMAIL, "|/var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject (some different address)") || die
"Uh oh, can't open inject: $!\n";
# Start sucking in message, get headers.
while ($line = <STDIN>) {
if ($line =~ /^\n$/) {
last;
}
push(@HEADERS, $line);
}
# Add a header.
$HEADER = "X-CUSTOM-HEADER: blah blah blah\n";
push(@HEADERS, $HEADER);
print QMAIL @HEADERS;
# Pump the rest of the message through.
print QMAIL "\n";
while ($line = <STDIN>) {
print QMAIL $line;
}
close QMAIL;
---------------------------------------
At 06:57 PM 3/24/99 -0800, you wrote:
>I am having a tough time stuffing a header into a message, and persuading
>it to stay put in a reply.
>I am currently under the assumption that it's the MUA that is stripping my
>custom header away before blasting the message though.
>However, other custom headers stay put.
>
>.qmail file just pipes the message to the perl script.
>
>
>perl script sucks it in, adds a header, and re-pipes it onward to
>qmail-inject at a different address.
>This parts works great. The problem: As soon as the message is replied
>to (using pretty much any MUA under the sun), the header mysteriously
>disappears. Perhaps I am writing it to the wrong spot?
>
>Any help would be appreciated.
>Perl source is below.
>
>
>--------------------------------
>
>#!/usr/bin/perl -w
>
>open(QMAIL, "|/var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject (some different address)") || die
>"Uh oh, can't open inject: $!\n";
>
># Start sucking in message, get headers.
>while ($line = <STDIN>) {
> if ($line =~ /^\n$/) {
> last;
> }
> push(@HEADERS, $line);
>}
>
>
># Add a header.
>$HEADER = "X-CUSTOM-HEADER: blah blah blah\n";
>push(@HEADERS, $TRACK_HEADER);
>
>print QMAIL @HEADERS;
>
># Pump the rest of the message through.
>print QMAIL "\n";
>while ($line = <STDIN>) {
> print QMAIL $line;
>}
>close QMAIL;
>
>------------
>Mahlon Smith
>InternetCDS
>541.773.9600
>
------------
Mahlon Smith
InternetCDS
541.773.9600
Mahlon Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> perl script sucks it in, adds a header, and re-pipes it onward to
> qmail-inject at a different address. This parts works great. The
> problem: As soon as the message is replied to (using pretty much any
> MUA under the sun), the header mysteriously disappears. Perhaps I am
> writing it to the wrong spot?
Er... I could be misunderstanding here, but since you specifically said
"replied to," could it be that you're working from an incorrect
assumption? Headers in a message aren't copied into replies to that
message. Is that what you're trying to do?
If not, I don't understand. What does it mean that the header disappears
when the message is replied to? Do you mean that the copy of the message
stored in that person's mailbox is altered so that the header is no longer
present?
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Hi friends!
I have fetchmail 4.3.9 in my linux box out.fake with Debian 2.0 and
kernel 2.0.34and qmail 1.03. I have a user called enr1co from where i
start fetchmail.
In /home/enr1co i have my .fetchmailrc that is this:
poll popmail.iol.it with protocol POP3 is enr1co there with password
my_internet_pass
enr1co is also my username in the POP3 machine of my internet provider.
Being connected and trying to fetch my emails i recieve this message from
fetchmail:
fetchmail: SMTP listener doesn't like recipient address 'enr1co@out'
fetchmail: can't even send to calling user!
fetchmail: SMTP transaction error while fetching from popmail.iol.it
What should i do??
__
Thanx,
Enrico.
On Thu, Mar 25, 1999 at 07:47:41AM +0100, Enrico Mangano wrote:
> fetchmail: SMTP listener doesn't like recipient address 'enr1co@out'
> fetchmail: can't even send to calling user!
> fetchmail: SMTP transaction error while fetching from popmail.iol.it
> What should i do??
Try putting:
---
defaults
forcecr
---
without '---' at the top of your .fetchmailrc
It is somewere at the fetchmail`s FAQ.
Regards,
Pashah
--
http://www.spb.sitek.net/~pashah/public-key-0x97739141.pgp
all of this talk about documentation has put me in a writing mood. I've
updated the qmail-howto to include instructions for rblsmtpd with both inetd
and xinetd (a real mind bender, I know).. And also getting qmail running with
supervise and cyclog, as well as a sample SysVinit script.
The URL, as usual, is http://www.flounder.net/qmail/qmail-howto.html
--Adam
---
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `:)'
Adam D. McKenna
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
