qmail Digest 2 Jun 2000 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1020
Topics (messages 42555 through 42591):
Re: How to pipe messages
42555 by: Peter Haworth
Translating qmail messages.
42556 by: Rodrigo Severo
42582 by: Russell Nelson
qmailadmin without ezmlm or autoresponder
42557 by: "Próspero, Esteban"
Re: Rumours (was: Re: Recipe For A Good Book On Qmail)
42558 by: Chin Fang
42569 by: Racer X
42571 by: Chin Fang
42572 by: Ian Lance Taylor
42584 by: Markus Stumpf
Qmail Analog
42559 by: Carlos Jorge Santos
42560 by: Charles Cazabon
42561 by: Carlos Jorge Santos
42587 by: shaoming
42588 by: Peter Samuel
Re: doc tarballs
42562 by: Uwe Ohse
Syslog is Evil to me!
42563 by: Magnus Naeslund
42564 by: Henrik Öhman
42565 by: Ryan Russell
applying SMTP SIZE patch
42566 by: Jim Breton
42573 by: Einar Bordewich
42574 by: Jon Rust
42575 by: Jim Breton
42586 by: Jon Rust
test
42567 by: Dan Phoenix
Re: Victory! (was: Syslog is Evil to me!)
42568 by: Magnus Naeslund
Qmail startup script install for FreeBSD
42570 by: net admin
42576 by: Martin Gignac
setuid execution not allowed
42577 by: Jasper Jans
42578 by: Peter Samuel
42581 by: Russ Allbery
42583 by: Jasper Jans
Re: FYI - Yahoos mail servers seem to be failing again.
42579 by: Russell Nelson
relaying problem
42580 by: Chester Chee
Error message Q
42585 by: Judy Simon
42589 by: Jim Breton
42590 by: Eric Cox
Reject mail by Subject field contents
42591 by: lopera.eprinsa.es
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Quezadaw wrote:
> I am trying to pipe the messages in qmail to go into another program called
> dmail. I am trying to pipe it in the rc file, but it is not working. Here
> is my rc file as it is right now.
>
> exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
> qmail-start ./Mailbox splogger qmail
>
> This works. But if I change the second line to:
> # qmail-start | /bin/dmail splogger qmail
>
> It does NOT work. I am a bit confused about what this line does.
Try using this instead (untested):
# qmail-start '| /bin/dmail' splogger qmail
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
People on the net are always telling other people to "get a life." It would
be so much simpler if there were one available under the GPL. "If you use
this life, you must tell other people where to get a life of their own."
Dear list,
I am interested in providing translated versions of qmail messages.
I want qmail to answer with the already existing messages AND with the
translated versions. Something like:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at fabricadeideias.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following
addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
Olá. Este é o programa qmail-send rodando em fabricadeideias.com.
Infelizmente não foi possível entregar sua mensagem para o endereço
abaixo.
Este é um erro permanente, eu não vou tentar novamente. É uma pena que
não tenha funcionado.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Has anybody tried it already? Does anybody knows about any issues
regarding this idea? Can someone give some clues about where to look for
the messages?
Thanks in advance for your attention,
Rodrigo Severo
P.S.: Just in case somebody is curious, the above translation is in
portuguese.
--
-------------------------------------------
Fábrica de Idéias
sbs - ed. empire center - bl. s - sala 109
cep 70070-904 - brasília-df - brazil
tel: (61) 321 1357
fax: (61) 321 6096
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------
Rodrigo Severo writes:
> I want qmail to answer with the already existing messages AND with the
> translated versions. Something like:
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Hi. This is the qmail-send program at fabricadeideias.com.
> I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following
> addresses.
> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
>
> Olá. Este é o programa qmail-send rodando em fabricadeideias.com.
> Infelizmente não foi possível entregar sua mensagem para o endereço
> abaixo.
> Este é um erro permanente, eu não vou tentar novamente. É uma pena que
> não tenha funcionado.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
This will not work unless you put a space on the (currently) blank
line in the paragraph above. Without a space, the Portugese text gets
interpreted by QSBMF readers as an email address and cause for the
bounce.
Otherwise, I see no reason why it shouldn't work, as long as you don't
break QSBMF.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
Hi everyone!
I've installed qmail 1.03 and vpopmail 3.4.11-2 released.
I'm installing qmailadmin for the first time and I don't intend to provide
mailing lists or autoresponders facilities for now. Can I install qmailadmin
anyway, if I don't have the other SW previously installed?
Thanks in advance!
Esteban Javier Próspero
\Maex,
> So please, measure, don't speculate.
Get the following hardware, OS, and configuration file, then either
the prstat(1) or top(1) will show you the size that I mentioned.
o any SUN UltraSPARC IIi box.
o SUN Solaris 8
o a /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts with 100k entries
each entry 63 chars long.
o qmail-smptd compiled using GCC 2.95.2 (for Solaris 8)
I observed the aforementioned sizes first hand during a simulated DOS
test that we did a while back. The numbers are reported by both
prstat(1) and top(1), they are not based on speculation. It's not
nice to call other's statements "speculation" before you can verify
the accuracy yourself.
Regards,
Chin Fang
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> \Maex
>
> --
> SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake
> Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't
> D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
>
let's see here. 63 characters is an enormously long domain name and
you're saying in effect that each domain has an AVERAGE length of 63
characters. you're assuming 100k domains on a single machine, which
again seems awful high to me.
the argument about process size is less than convincing. a modern unix
will not attempt to read that same file directly from disk every time
qmail-smtpd is invoked, it will hit the buffer cache. every qmail-smtpd
instance will be reading from the same cache, and unless i'm too
mistaken, each instance will hit the same physical pages of memory.
further, it's unlikely (at least based on my experience) that every
qmail-smtpd will have to go through the entire rcpthosts file every
single time a message comes in, so the CPU argument is a little iffy
too.
i'll admit for the sake of argument that a huge rcpthosts file could
potentially cause problems, but one assumes that a sysadmin who has to
deal with a setup that large can be bothered to read the documentation
and see the notes about morercpthosts.
shag
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chin Fang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thu 1 Jun 2000 8:44
Subject: Re: Rumours (was: Re: Recipe For A Good Book On Qmail)
> \Maex,
>
> > So please, measure, don't speculate.
>
> Get the following hardware, OS, and configuration file, then either
> the prstat(1) or top(1) will show you the size that I mentioned.
>
> o any SUN UltraSPARC IIi box.
> o SUN Solaris 8
> o a /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts with 100k entries
> each entry 63 chars long.
> o qmail-smptd compiled using GCC 2.95.2 (for Solaris 8)
>
> I observed the aforementioned sizes first hand during a simulated DOS
> test that we did a while back. The numbers are reported by both
> prstat(1) and top(1), they are not based on speculation. It's not
> nice to call other's statements "speculation" before you can verify
> the accuracy yourself.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chin Fang
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > \Maex
> >
> > --
> > SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is
when you wake
> > Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming
and you
> > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you
haven't
> > D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen
asleep yet.
> >
>
>
As I stated in my follow up, the numbers were observed during a test.
For testing, we used the 63 characters for domain names since it's
longest legal length (67 if the dot, and tgld included).
Furthermore, unless you have exactly the same setup (both hardware and
software), to extrapolate your own experience into mine (which you may
or many not have) is not convincing, IHMO. I stated what I observed,
that's it.
Why don't we stop arguing about the numbers. I have given my
hardware/OS/qmail setup, please go ahead and try it yourself. That's
"measure", not "speculation". I look forward to seeing your
observations, and I won't immediately jump in and label them as
"speculation" either ;)
Regards,
Chin Fang
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> let's see here. 63 characters is an enormously long domain name and
> you're saying in effect that each domain has an AVERAGE length of 63
> characters. you're assuming 100k domains on a single machine, which
> again seems awful high to me.
>
> the argument about process size is less than convincing. a modern unix
> will not attempt to read that same file directly from disk every time
> qmail-smtpd is invoked, it will hit the buffer cache. every qmail-smtpd
> instance will be reading from the same cache, and unless i'm too
> mistaken, each instance will hit the same physical pages of memory.
>
> further, it's unlikely (at least based on my experience) that every
> qmail-smtpd will have to go through the entire rcpthosts file every
> single time a message comes in, so the CPU argument is a little iffy
> too.
>
> i'll admit for the sake of argument that a huge rcpthosts file could
> potentially cause problems, but one assumes that a sysadmin who has to
> deal with a setup that large can be bothered to read the documentation
> and see the notes about morercpthosts.
>
> shag
[...]
From: "Racer X" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 13:32:01 -0700
further, it's unlikely (at least based on my experience) that every
qmail-smtpd will have to go through the entire rcpthosts file every
single time a message comes in, so the CPU argument is a little iffy
too.
qmail-smtpd always reads the entire rcpthosts file when it
initializes. main calls setup calls rcpthosts_init calls
control_readfile which reads the entire file.
Ian
On Thu, Jun 01, 2000 at 02:31:25PM -0700, Chin Fang wrote:
> Why don't we stop arguing about the numbers. I have given my
> hardware/OS/qmail setup, please go ahead and try it yourself. That's
> "measure", not "speculation". I look forward to seeing your
> observations, and I won't immediately jump in and label them as
> "speculation" either ;)
You've not given any information about that and what you have measured
at the time I made this statement.
I've given what I'd call "real life" numbers and IMHO my statement that
a big "real life" rcpthosts file is not a problem still holds. Therefor
I still disagree that a newbie admin at an ISP will run into problems
not using a morereceipthosts file.
I admit that your numbers with your setup are correct ;-)
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
Hi everybody...
I'm just a newbie to the linux world, but despite that i've setup a Linux
relay mail server using qmail, and it works fine...
My problem is that i cant get QmailAnalog to work, i've done everything
stated in the documentation.
for instance this should work, or not?
cat /var/log/maillog | matchup | zoverall
Well it says that 0 messages completed
And the maillog has almost 100 messages delivered
It's just my problem? Can anyone give me a help?
Thanks
Carlos Santos
I'm running Red Hat 6.2 (kernel 2.2.14) + Qmail 1.03 + tcpserver
Carlos Jorge Santos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> My problem is that i cant get QmailAnalog to work, i've done everything
> stated in the documentation.
>
> for instance this should work, or not?
>
> cat /var/log/maillog | matchup | zoverall
qmail-analog expects the first thing on the log line to be the timestamp
(and in the format it expects, too). How are you logging? Through
syslog? Dan gives an awk recipe in the qmail-analog documentation to
convert syslog-style logs to what qmail-analog expects.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
At 10:11 AM 6/1/00 -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
>
>qmail-analog expects the first thing on the log line to be the timestamp
>(and in the format it expects, too). How are you logging? Through
>syslog? Dan gives an awk recipe in the qmail-analog documentation to
>convert syslog-style logs to what qmail-analog expects.
That was my problem....
It's working..
Thanks a lot
Carlos Santos
Hi !
I'm trying to generate the stats but to no avail. I use the following
command, is it correct?
awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' /var/log/maillog |
/usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/matchup | /usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/zoverall
But it still give me the following ...
Completed messages: 0
Total delivery attempts: 0
any idea what could be the problem?
Carlos Jorge Santos wrote:
>
> At 10:11 AM 6/1/00 -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> >
> >qmail-analog expects the first thing on the log line to be the timestamp
> >(and in the format it expects, too). How are you logging? Through
> >syslog? Dan gives an awk recipe in the qmail-analog documentation to
> >convert syslog-style logs to what qmail-analog expects.
>
> That was my problem....
> It's working..
>
> Thanks a lot
> Carlos Santos
On Fri, 2 Jun 2000, shaoming wrote:
>
> Hi !
>
> I'm trying to generate the stats but to no avail. I use the following
> command, is it correct?
>
> awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' /var/log/maillog |
> /usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/matchup | /usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/zoverall
>
> But it still give me the following ...
>
> Completed messages: 0
> Total delivery attempts: 0
Can you send us a few lines of your logfile /var/log/maillog. Then we
can tell you what you should be doing.
Regards
Peter
----------
Peter Samuel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Technical Consultant or at present:
eServ. Pty Ltd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: +61 2 9206 3410 Fax: +61 2 9281 1301
"If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left"
On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 12:44:04PM +0200, Felix von Leitner wrote:
> Is anyone willing to help port the djb docs to man pages?
fix "man". Do not duplicate information/confusion.
Yeah, i know, "man" is a big monster nobody really likes to touch.
I can understand that, i just had a look into three man packages.
But that's a hell of an excuse for the duplication of information.
Anyway, `h dnscache' is good enough for me (info, man, html).
Regards, Uwe (who actually is surprised that linux man finally runs
on a machine with only "nosuid" mounted file systems).
My mailserver runs an RedHat Linux based "homemade dist" OS.
It's a pII 233 MHZ, and it's got 96 MB memory (+256mb swap).
When qmail starts delivering, the syslogd daemon spikes to around 86% CPU,
and it's nearly all taken by the system, not in userspace.
My maillogs get around 25MB a week (maybe one can trim down that size a bit,
by logging only errors in the "long" format ??).
But when i tail -f /var/log/maillog i don't really think that it's logging
that fast (even after a -ALRM signal to qmail-send with ~800 mails in the
queue).
So if i take like 25/7days/24 hours i get around 150KB logging per hour.
That does not justify a 80% load of my system on syslogd's behalf...
Does anyone recognize this, or even better have a solution?
Any tip at all is super-welcome :)
/Magnus Naeslund
Solution: Don't use syslog.
The FAQ actually has a section about this which suggests you to use
multilog in the daemontools-package instead.
I'm using syslog-ng, but I'm not under so much load that I could compare
that with other alternatives. Does anyone have experiences with syslog-ng?
Is it as bad as the original syslog?
Henrik.
At 07:15 PM 6/1/2000 +0200, you wrote:
>My mailserver runs an RedHat Linux based "homemade dist" OS.
>It's a pII 233 MHZ, and it's got 96 MB memory (+256mb swap).
>When qmail starts delivering, the syslogd daemon spikes to around 86% CPU,
>and it's nearly all taken by the system, not in userspace.
>
>My maillogs get around 25MB a week (maybe one can trim down that size a bit,
>by logging only errors in the "long" format ??).
>But when i tail -f /var/log/maillog i don't really think that it's logging
>that fast (even after a -ALRM signal to qmail-send with ~800 mails in the
>queue).
>So if i take like 25/7days/24 hours i get around 150KB logging per hour.
>That does not justify a 80% load of my system on syslogd's behalf...
>
>Does anyone recognize this, or even better have a solution?
>
>Any tip at all is super-welcome :)
>
>
>/Magnus Naeslund
Other than dying at times for no apparant reason, syslog-ng seems to work
well. It's got some nice features to it, like automatically building out
a dir structure for different dates and hosts.
I wasn't getting my syslog output from qmail with the Solaris x86 syslog.
Ryan
On Thu, 1 Jun 2000, Henrik =?iso-8859-1?Q?Öhman?= wrote:
> Solution: Don't use syslog.
>
> The FAQ actually has a section about this which suggests you to use
> multilog in the daemontools-package instead.
>
> I'm using syslog-ng, but I'm not under so much load that I could compare
> that with other alternatives. Does anyone have experiences with syslog-ng?
> Is it as bad as the original syslog?
>
> Henrik.
>
> At 07:15 PM 6/1/2000 +0200, you wrote:
> >My mailserver runs an RedHat Linux based "homemade dist" OS.
> >It's a pII 233 MHZ, and it's got 96 MB memory (+256mb swap).
> >When qmail starts delivering, the syslogd daemon spikes to around 86% CPU,
> >and it's nearly all taken by the system, not in userspace.
> >
> >My maillogs get around 25MB a week (maybe one can trim down that size a bit,
> >by logging only errors in the "long" format ??).
> >But when i tail -f /var/log/maillog i don't really think that it's logging
> >that fast (even after a -ALRM signal to qmail-send with ~800 mails in the
> >queue).
> >So if i take like 25/7days/24 hours i get around 150KB logging per hour.
> >That does not justify a 80% load of my system on syslogd's behalf...
> >
> >Does anyone recognize this, or even better have a solution?
> >
> >Any tip at all is super-welcome :)
> >
> >
> >/Magnus Naeslund
>
Hi, sorry for the lame thread, but I'm having a hard time applying the
patch:
http://will.harris.ch/qmail-smtpd.c.diff
to qmail-smtpd.c.
Note that I downloaded the patch using "wget" and it did not insert any
extraneous carriage returns, etc. into the file.
The diff, after I download it, is 2463 bytes. My qmail-smtpd.c is the
original, unpatched version, and it is 11262 bytes.
Here is the error I get:
$ patch --verbose < qmail-smtpd.c.diff
Hmm... Looks like a new-style context diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|*** qmail-smtpd.c.orig Mon May 29 11:54:41 2000
|--- qmail-smtpd.c Wed May 31 11:44:21 2000
--------------------------
Patching file `qmail-smtpd.c' using Plan A...
Hunk #1 succeeded at 52.
patch: **** unexpected end of hunk at line 56
System is Debian GNU/Linux, potato. patch --version reports:
$ patch --version
patch 2.5
Copyright 1988 Larry Wall
Copyright 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This program comes with NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
You may redistribute copies of this program
under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
For more information about these matters, see the file named COPYING.
written by Larry Wall with lots o' patches by Paul Eggert
I have tried various command-line arguments to patch (including -R) with
no success. Would someone be kind enough to send me his copy of the
patched qmail-smtpd.c so I can generate my own diff?
Also if anyone could tell me why this is happening, it would help. The
diff itself looks fine to my eyes.
I started applying the patch by hand, which was fine for the first
(non-mail-rejecting) patch, but this one is getting under my skin with
the combination of changing line numbers, and the fact that I have no
idea what "!" signifies at the beginning of a diff line, and that the
line looks exactly the same as the original, etc.. (My frustration
tolerance is quite low today.) ;)
Thanks.
I had the same problem, so I patched it manually. Her it is with the patch
applied.
If you rename your old file to qmail-smtpd.c.orig and do a "diff -c
qmail-smtpd.c.orig qmail-smtpd.c |more", you should see output quite equal
to the patch.
BTW: The initial size on qmail-smtpd.c was 11262 bytes.
--
--------------------------------------------
IDG New Media Einar Bordewich
Technical Manager Phone: +47 2336 1420
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Breton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 7:52 PM
Subject: applying SMTP SIZE patch
: Hi, sorry for the lame thread, but I'm having a hard time applying the
: patch:
:
: http://will.harris.ch/qmail-smtpd.c.diff
:
: to qmail-smtpd.c.
:
: Note that I downloaded the patch using "wget" and it did not insert any
: extraneous carriage returns, etc. into the file.
:
: The diff, after I download it, is 2463 bytes. My qmail-smtpd.c is the
: original, unpatched version, and it is 11262 bytes.
:
: Here is the error I get:
:
: $ patch --verbose < qmail-smtpd.c.diff
: Hmm... Looks like a new-style context diff to me...
: The text leading up to this was:
: --------------------------
: |*** qmail-smtpd.c.orig Mon May 29 11:54:41 2000
: |--- qmail-smtpd.c Wed May 31 11:44:21 2000
: --------------------------
: Patching file `qmail-smtpd.c' using Plan A...
: Hunk #1 succeeded at 52.
: patch: **** unexpected end of hunk at line 56
:
:
: System is Debian GNU/Linux, potato. patch --version reports:
:
: $ patch --version
: patch 2.5
: Copyright 1988 Larry Wall
: Copyright 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
:
: This program comes with NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
: You may redistribute copies of this program
: under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
: For more information about these matters, see the file named COPYING.
:
: written by Larry Wall with lots o' patches by Paul Eggert
:
:
: I have tried various command-line arguments to patch (including -R) with
: no success. Would someone be kind enough to send me his copy of the
: patched qmail-smtpd.c so I can generate my own diff?
:
: Also if anyone could tell me why this is happening, it would help. The
: diff itself looks fine to my eyes.
:
: I started applying the patch by hand, which was fine for the first
: (non-mail-rejecting) patch, but this one is getting under my skin with
: the combination of changing line numbers, and the fact that I have no
: idea what "!" signifies at the beginning of a diff line, and that the
: line looks exactly the same as the original, etc.. (My frustration
: tolerance is quite low today.) ;)
:
: Thanks.
:
:
qmail-smtpd.c.size-patched.tar.gz
FWIW, I used the patch as posted to this list (below) and had no
problems applying it.
jon
At 12:38 AM +0200 6/2/00, Einar Bordewich wrote:
>I had the same problem, so I patched it manually. Her it is with the patch
>applied.
>If you rename your old file to qmail-smtpd.c.orig and do a "diff -c
>qmail-smtpd.c.orig qmail-smtpd.c |more", you should see output quite equal
>to the patch.
>
>BTW: The initial size on qmail-smtpd.c was 11262 bytes.
>--
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Remote-IP: 130.60.48.21
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 12:08:34 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Will Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: SMTP SIZE command revisited (new patch)
Status: U
I've extended the little patch I wrote earlier to make qmail fully RFC
1870 compliant, including the extended MAIL FROM ... SIZE syntax.
You can also get it from my website, http://will.harris.ch.
regards,
Will
*** qmail-smtpd.c.orig Mon May 29 11:54:41 2000
--- qmail-smtpd.c Wed May 31 11:44:21 2000
***************
*** 52,57 ****
--- 52,58 ----
void err_bmf() { out("553 sorry, your envelope sender is in my
badmailfrom list (#5.7.1)\r\n"); }
void err_nogateway() { out("553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list
of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)\r\n"); }
void err_unimpl() { out("502 unimplemented (#5.5.1)\r\n"); }
+ void err_size() { out("552 sorry, that message size exceeds my
databytes limit (#5.3.4)\r\n"); }
void err_syntax() { out("555 syntax error (#5.5.4)\r\n"); }
void err_wantmail() { out("503 MAIL first (#5.5.1)\r\n"); }
void err_wantrcpt() { out("503 RCPT first (#5.5.1)\r\n"); }
***************
*** 197,202 ****
--- 198,239 ----
return 1;
}
+ int sizelimit(arg)
+ char *arg;
+ {
+ int i;
+ long r;
+ unsigned long sizebytes = 0;
+
+ if (r < 0) return 0;
+
+ i = str_chr(arg,'<');
+ if (arg[i])
+ arg += i + 1;
+ else {
+ arg += str_chr(arg,':');
+ if (*arg == ':') ++arg;
+ while (*arg == ' ') ++arg;
+ }
+
+ arg += str_chr(arg,' ');
+ if (*arg == ' ') while (*arg == ' ') ++arg;
+ else return 1;
+
+ i = str_chr(arg,'=');
+ arg[i] = 0;
+ if (case_equals(arg,"SIZE")) {
+ arg += i;
+ while (*++arg && *arg > 47 && *arg < 58) {
+ sizebytes *= 10;
+ sizebytes += *arg - 48;
+ }
+ r = databytes - sizebytes;
+ if (r < 0) return 0;
+ }
+ return 1;
+ }
+
int bmfcheck()
{
int j;
***************
*** 227,235 ****
smtp_greet("250 "); out("\r\n");
seenmail = 0; dohelo(arg);
}
void smtp_ehlo(arg) char *arg;
{
! smtp_greet("250-"); out("\r\n250-PIPELINING\r\n250 8BITMIME\r\n");
seenmail = 0; dohelo(arg);
}
void smtp_rset()
--- 264,279 ----
smtp_greet("250 "); out("\r\n");
seenmail = 0; dohelo(arg);
}
+ char size_buf[FMT_ULONG];
+ void smtp_size()
+ {
+ size_buf[fmt_ulong(size_buf,(unsigned long) databytes)] = 0;
+ out("250 SIZE "); out(size_buf); out("\r\n");
+ }
void smtp_ehlo(arg) char *arg;
{
! smtp_greet("250-"); out("\r\n250-PIPELINING\r\n250-8BITMIME\r\n");
! smtp_size();
seenmail = 0; dohelo(arg);
}
void smtp_rset()
***************
*** 240,245 ****
--- 284,290 ----
void smtp_mail(arg) char *arg;
{
if (!addrparse(arg)) { err_syntax(); return; }
+ if (!sizelimit(arg)) { err_size(); return; }
flagbarf = bmfcheck();
seenmail = 1;
if (!stralloc_copys(&rcptto,"")) die_nomem();
On Thu, Jun 01, 2000 at 04:58:14PM -0700, Jon Rust wrote:
> FWIW, I used the patch as posted to this list (below) and had no
> problems applying it.
What OS, and what version of "patch" do you use, if you don't mind my
asking?
bash-2.03$ uname -a
FreeBSD host.vcnet.com 3.3-RELEASE FreeBSD 3.3-RELEASE #1: Wed Oct 20
20:43:43 PDT 1999
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/compile/CUSTKERN i386
bash-2.03$ patch -v
Patch version 2.1
jon
At 12:03 AM +0000 6/2/00, Jim Breton wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 01, 2000 at 04:58:14PM -0700, Jon Rust wrote:
>> FWIW, I used the patch as posted to this list (below) and had no
>> problems applying it.
>
>What OS, and what version of "patch" do you use, if you don't mind my
>asking?
i hope this is the right email.....
adding defaulthost did nothing for me
when i send from behind firewall....
it still comes up as my firewall name
..and not my defaulthost path.
Dan
Okay, i guess you all wanna hear success stories?
Well i got one for ya!
Before:
Using syslog/splogger.
50 in concurrencyremote.
I do a "killall -ALRM qmail-send".
Syslog was at >80%, mostly kernel time.
Not counting qmail daemons CPU%.
Load was at worst ~3.50.
The box was kinda crawling (that means you can't play quake on it :) ).
After:
Using multilogger.
110 in concurrencyremote.
I do a "killall -ALRM qmail-send".
Syslog was quiet (well it should be :)
WHOLE SYSTEM cpu usage was around 6-8% (with ~100 qmail-remote's doing their
thing, but they were mostly rejected by different (but leagal) reasons)
The load was at worst ~0.80.
I could play quake quite nicely.
Salute to multilogger over syslogd for this kinda biz!
/Magnus Näslund
Hi folks;
I am in need of example startup script for Qmail on a FreeBSD system,
I am assuming the script will be in:
-- /usr/local/etc/rc.d and "Qmail.sh" will do for filename
I also have /usr/local/etc/rc.d/tcpserver.sh which will start
tcpserver smtp on startup and contains:
#!/bin/sh
tcpserver -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u1111 -g10047 0 smtp
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
(all in one line)
I am not yet on the list so please forward reply to me.
Thanks
Dan
Here is my own /usr/local/etc/rc.d/qmail.sh on a FreeBSD 4.0 system:
#!/bin/sh
># Using splogger to send the log through syslog.
># Using qmail-local to deliver messages to ~/Mailbox by default.
>exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
>qmail-start ./Mailbox splogger qmail&
>/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -R -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u82 -g81 0 smtp
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
The file is the vanilla one furnished with the qmail-1.03 port, installed as
per installation instructions. The file contains the instructions to start
both qmail and tcpserver. The -R option is just a workaround for our
firewall dropping ident packets.
-Martin
----- Original Message -----
From: "net admin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 17:01
Subject: Qmail startup script install for FreeBSD
> Hi folks;
> I am in need of example startup script for Qmail on a FreeBSD system,
> I am assuming the script will be in:
>
> -- /usr/local/etc/rc.d and "Qmail.sh" will do for filename
>
> I also have /usr/local/etc/rc.d/tcpserver.sh which will start
> tcpserver smtp on startup and contains:
>
> #!/bin/sh
> tcpserver -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u1111 -g10047 0 smtp
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
> (all in one line)
>
> I am not yet on the list so please forward reply to me.
>
> Thanks
>
> Dan
>
>
Hi,
I just installed qmail but I cant get it to run properly.
The system is a Sun Solaris E250 running Sol 7.
/var/adm/messages gives me this:
May 30 04:19:41 uxtrav03 unix: NOTICE: qmail-queue, uid 100: setuid
execution not allowed, dev=800004
May 30 04:53:11 uxtrav03 unix: NOTICE: qmail-queue, uid 333: setuid
execution not allowed, dev=800004
May 30 05:05:00 uxtrav03 unix: NOTICE: qmail-queue, uid 0: setuid
execution not allowed, dev=800004
I read the archive and saw how to fix this by hand - chown-ing the
mail in the queue to qmailq - and that works. But mail gets only
inserted in the queue when i send mail from the root account -
else all i get is the warning. I could not find a real fix for this
problem as well in the archive.
qmail-queue in /var/qmail/bin has the following permissions:
# ls -l /var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue
-rws--x--x 1 qmailq qmail 19880 May 30 05:12
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-queue
/var/qmail/queue directory has these permissions:
# ls -l /var/qmail/queue
total 18
drwx------ 2 qmails qmail 512 May 30 03:11 bounce
drwx------ 25 qmails qmail 512 May 30 03:11 info
drwx------ 2 qmailq qmail 512 May 30 05:11 intd
drwx------ 25 qmails qmail 512 May 30 03:11 local
drwxr-x--- 2 qmailq qmail 512 May 30 03:11 lock
drwxr-x--- 25 qmailq qmail 512 May 30 03:11 mess
drwx------ 2 qmailq qmail 512 May 30 05:11 pid
drwx------ 25 qmails qmail 512 May 30 03:11 remote
drwxr-x--- 2 qmailq qmail 512 May 30 05:11 todo
I also ran qmail-qsanity-0.52 and qmail-lint-0.55 on it - both
reported no errors. Rerunning make setup check does not fix it
as well.
Can anyone tell me what i'm doing wrong?
Thanks,
Jasper
Unix IS user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends are.
On Fri, 2 Jun 2000, Jasper Jans wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just installed qmail but I cant get it to run properly.
> The system is a Sun Solaris E250 running Sol 7.
> /var/adm/messages gives me this:
> May 30 04:19:41 uxtrav03 unix: NOTICE: qmail-queue, uid 100: setuid
> execution not allowed, dev=800004
> May 30 04:53:11 uxtrav03 unix: NOTICE: qmail-queue, uid 333: setuid
> execution not allowed, dev=800004
> May 30 05:05:00 uxtrav03 unix: NOTICE: qmail-queue, uid 0: setuid
> execution not allowed, dev=800004
Looks like the file system is mounted with the nosuid option. What
does /etc/vfstab say for the /var filesystem (or whatever is the root of
the filesystem holding /var/qmail). If it has domething like
-o nosuid
then that tells the kernel not to honour the setuid bits on files. SO
even if the permissions are correct, qmail-queue will NEVER be
executed with an effective user id of qmailq.
You can also do the following
mount | grep /var
You'll need to remount the file system without the nosuid option.
BE CAREFUL. This may have other security implications on YOUR system.
I can't say what they are because I don't know what else is in your
system.
Regards
Peter
----------
Peter Samuel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Technical Consultant or at present:
eServ. Pty Ltd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: +61 2 9206 3410 Fax: +61 2 9281 1301
"If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left"
Jasper Jans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I just installed qmail but I cant get it to run properly.
> The system is a Sun Solaris E250 running Sol 7.
> /var/adm/messages gives me this:
> May 30 04:19:41 uxtrav03 unix: NOTICE: qmail-queue, uid 100: setuid
> execution not allowed, dev=800004
> May 30 04:53:11 uxtrav03 unix: NOTICE: qmail-queue, uid 333: setuid
> execution not allowed, dev=800004
> May 30 05:05:00 uxtrav03 unix: NOTICE: qmail-queue, uid 0: setuid
> execution not allowed, dev=800004
You've mounted the file system /var/qmail is on nosetuid. You can't do
that.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Thanks for the fast and helpfull responses.
Its up and running now.
Jasper
Unix IS user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends are.
5:23am up 55 day(s), 6:45, 2 users, load average: 0.06, 0.02, 0.02
Bryan White writes:
> I have not dug into it yet but on the surface it looks like it did a couple
> of months ago.
The last time that happened, I was on site in Istanbul, and had *just*
finished the transition to the new server (three front ends over a
NetApp), and they're like "Yeeks! Russell!! We can't send mail to
Yahoo!!! Save us!!!!".
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
When I try to send mail via smtp (using qmail), I got this error. MAIL FROM:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]@cal.arising.net instead of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Any idea how to fix this is greatly appreciated. I
think this is configuration issues, but I am not sure where. I am using
Qmail 1.0.3, Vpopmail, MySQL, and TWIG (this is where I send my mail from).
Thanks in advance.
Hello All,
I tried to find an explaination for this error message, but could
not. I would like to know if I did something wrong, or left out a
step. Please advise -Thanks much in advance!
My problem: Qmail was already set up and I added another domain
[p.jt.com] MANUALLYto the rcpthosts file and p.jt.com:judy to the
virtualdomains file. the local "real" host is jt.bl.com. the domain
web site p.jt.com is available.
I sent myself a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] from another account [this
one I am currently writing from] and got this error message back:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sorry. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host,
it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6)
The only way I successfully sent user judy [actually a .qmail-judy
alias in the /home/p directory] a message was to send to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [ie. use the user-alias combination on the real
host name]
my questions are:
1. how do I get qmail to acknowledge the p.jt.com I put in the
rcpthosts and virtualdomains files?
2. how do I get it to respond to the alias alone without the user
tagged on before it?
3. is there some command to automatically enter the new user that I
should have used instead of manually editing the 2 files.
4. if by manually editing the files, how to i return them to their
previous state? [i did try to cp the older rcpthost~ back onto the
rcpthosts file.
Again, I'm sorry for sounding like such a newbie, but I need to get
these emails up and running soon and I was getting a bit confused by
all the howto's online...
thanks again,
judy simon
--
Judy Simon
=====================
J-Town Productionsm, LTD
Jerusalem, Israel
On Fri, Jun 02, 2000 at 09:07:06AM +0300, Judy Simon wrote:
> I sent myself a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] from another account [this
> one I am currently writing from] and got this error message back:
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sorry. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host,
> it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6)
>
> The only way I successfully sent user judy [actually a .qmail-judy
> alias in the /home/p directory] a message was to send to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ie. use the user-alias combination on the real
> host name]
>
> my questions are:
> 1. how do I get qmail to acknowledge the p.jt.com I put in the
> rcpthosts and virtualdomains files?
You should send a SIGHUP signal to the qmail-send process. This will
force it to re-read virtualdomains (and locals).
Once your domain is found in virtualdomains, you won't need it in
"locals." In fact, make sure it is in one or the other of these files
but _never_ in both.
> 2. how do I get it to respond to the alias alone without the user
> tagged on before it?
This will also work once virtualdomains is read.
> 3. is there some command to automatically enter the new user that I
> should have used instead of manually editing the 2 files.
You did the right thing. :)
> 4. if by manually editing the files, how to i return them to their
> previous state? [i did try to cp the older rcpthost~ back onto the
> rcpthosts file.
However you want; just be sure to send the HUP signal again if you
change locals or virtualdomains.
Judy Simon wrote:
>
> 4. if by manually editing the files, how to i return them to their
> previous state? [i did try to cp the older rcpthost~ back onto the
> rcpthosts file.
I use a CVS server (http://www.cvshome.org/) for this - works really
well too. I have it setup to automatically send a SIGHUP to qmail-send
a few minutes after I change a file, and if I make a mistake, I just rm
the file, and do a cvs update on it. Also, I can "go back in time" on
the whole config, or maintain more than one config for different setups.
> Again, I'm sorry for sounding like such a newbie, but I need to get
> these emails up and running soon and I was getting a bit confused by
> all the howto's online...
We've all been there... :)
Eric
I have downloaded the 'qtools' from the QMAIL pages. I want to reject
mail whose "Subject:" field contains the word "*Insurance*", "*sex*", and
others.
Does anybody have an example of the scripts to modify?
Thanks
