Re: [arch-general] arch-general Digest, Vol 140, Issue 10

[Information Technology Works]

On 06/08/2016 08:00 PM, arch-general-requ...@archlinux.org wrote:
> been using thunderbird which
> automatically does that for mail lists - now with it's impending demise
> I am trying other mailers
https://blog.mozilla.org/thunderbird/files/2016/04/Finding-a-Home-for-Thunderbird.pdf

[arch-general] pacman question - missing files (repost)

[Genes Lists via arch-general]

(Reposting in plain text - so sorry - been using thunderbird which
automatically does that for mail lists - now with it's impending demise
I am trying other mailers - like evolution ... )

I've seen this behavior a couple of times now. Here's what happened
today.

After installing systemd and libsystemd 230-4 (updating from 230-3). No errors 
reported.
However computer refused to boot properly. Booting recovery and examining the 
logs showed that libsystemd.so was missing - complaint by udev.

/usr/lib/libsystemd.so was present as a link pointing to libsystemd.so.0.15.0 
which was absent.
running pacman -Qk libsystemd
confirmed the problem file.
reinstalling libsystemd from cache - in recovery chroot - gave a warning about 
the link and the the libraryfile 
something like - warning: could not get file information for 
/usr/lib/libsystemd.so and .same for .so.0.15.0
And indeed the file was still absent. 

from same cachea rea I  installed libsystemd and systemd 230-3 (i.e. 
downgrading) - this worked and the library is back now and I could boot with 
udev dying a squirrely death.

I have had same problem (missing files with no warnings) with other updates - 
last time was glibc - that was fun to fix ... konsole wont start without glibc 

There were other less impactful ones in recent months  - about time pacman 5 
moved to testing - not saying its pacman itself - but something is amiss - 
could be hardware, kernel or ?? I have no errors in the log files. and do not 
see any issues from smartctl either.

In all cases pacman -Qk finds the problem - and in all cases there were no 
errors reported on initial install -and there were similar warnings as zbove on 
re-install of same package from cache file.

In every case there was a shared library with a sym link - and the actual 
library file was missing.

Any suggestions for tracking this down? I assume if the package file was 
corrupted pacman would complain and redownload - so I'm a bit stumped ... 

thanks for any guidance.

gene

Re: [arch-general] mdmonitor.service /usr/lib/systemd/scripts/mdadm_env.sh: No such file or directory

[Martin Kühne via arch-general]

Smells like EPROBLEM.
If there's no problem beyond logspam, you'll have a hard time to get
the improvement accepted.
Question though, now that you made me curious, do you patch out gtk
debug messages for your GUI apps?

cheers!
mar77i

Re: [arch-general] DKMS question around removal of kernel modules

[Genes Lists via arch-general]

On Wed, 2016-06-08 at 20:05 +0200, Bruno Pagani wrote:
> Le 08/06/2016 à 20:03, Genes Lists via arch-general a écrit :
> 
> > When I install a new kernel, I notice that DKMS removes previous
> > kernel
> > ...
> 
> That’s expected, and in fact the same thing happens for normal kernel
> module. I don’t see why DKMS module should be treated differently. ;)
> 
> Bruno
> 

Thanks for comments all ... makes sense :-)

g

Re: [arch-general] mdmonitor.service /usr/lib/systemd/scripts/mdadm_env.sh: No such file or directory

[David C. Rankin]

On 06/08/2016 05:22 PM, Wilhelm Schuster wrote:
> That's a weird, since mdadm_env.sh only gets installed on SUSE systems.
> See the following line from the Makefile (line 316):
> 
> if [ -f /etc/SuSE-release -o -n "$(SUSE)" ]; then
>   $(INSTALL) -D -m 755 systemd/SUSE-mdadm_env.sh \
> $(DESTDIR)$(SYSTEMD_DIR)/../scripts/mdadm_env.sh
> fi
> 
> http://git.neil.brown.name/?p=mdadm.git;a=blob;f=Makefile;h=5fd7f166e7e14f24078b2394398234342930b227;hb=HEAD#l316
> 
> Originating commit:
> http://git.neil.brown.name/?p=mdadm.git;a=commitdiff;h=61c094715836e76b66d7a69adcb6769127b5b77d
> 
> Also, personally I've never seen /usr/lib/systemd/scripts used on Arch.
> I don't think that's an official (as in used by systemd upstream)
> directory (though I'm not sure).

Yes, this is strange. It seems like the PKGBUILD should take into consideration
that there will be no mdadm_env.sh installed on Arch and tweak the
mdmonitor.service file accordingly with sed or the like to either eliminate the
EXEC attempt to run the script, or at least install an empty "stub" mdadm_env.sh
that does nothing but eliminates the boot error.

I'll leave it up to the masterminds here. If this is an issue that needs a bug
filed, let me know, I'm happy to file it.

-- 
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

Re: [arch-general] mdmonitor.service /usr/lib/systemd/scripts/mdadm_env.sh: No such file or directory

[Wilhelm Schuster]

Hi David,

On 06/09/2016 12:05 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:
> Now we have a conundrum, the mdadm folks seem to think the missing file is an
> Arch problem:
> 
> (from linux-r...@vger.kernel.org, contributing redhat dev):
> 
> On 06/07/2016 02:31 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> "David C. Rankin"  writes:
>>> Neil, All,
>>>
>>>   I'm chasing down the reason there is no
>>> /usr/lib/systemd/scripts/mdadm_env.sh provided with mdadm. This is
>>> more a curiosity really as mdmonitor continues to run, but it always
>>> throws an error at boot:
>>>
>>> Jun 05 17:12:47 valhalla systemd[454]: mdmonitor.service: Failed at step 
>>> EXEC
>>> spawning /usr/lib/systemd/scripts/mdadm_env.sh: No such file or directory
>>>
>>>   I have several Arch servers, all on mdadm 3.4-1. I ran into an issue
>>> a year or so ago with a boot error with mdmonitor due to my failure to
>>> provide MAILADDR in /etc/mdadm.com, but that has long since been
>>> corrected:
>>
>> If you're running Arch Linux, you probably want to direct this question
>> to the Arch Linux maintainers.
>>
>> Jes
>>
> 
> So is this something that needs to be filed as a bug here. The package is
> certainly missing something. The mdmonitor.service file is pointing to a file
> that does not exist in the package. What say the Arch devs?

That's a weird, since mdadm_env.sh only gets installed on SUSE systems.
See the following line from the Makefile (line 316):

if [ -f /etc/SuSE-release -o -n "$(SUSE)" ]; then
  $(INSTALL) -D -m 755 systemd/SUSE-mdadm_env.sh \
$(DESTDIR)$(SYSTEMD_DIR)/../scripts/mdadm_env.sh
fi

http://git.neil.brown.name/?p=mdadm.git;a=blob;f=Makefile;h=5fd7f166e7e14f24078b2394398234342930b227;hb=HEAD#l316

Originating commit:
http://git.neil.brown.name/?p=mdadm.git;a=commitdiff;h=61c094715836e76b66d7a69adcb6769127b5b77d

Also, personally I've never seen /usr/lib/systemd/scripts used on Arch.
I don't think that's an official (as in used by systemd upstream)
directory (though I'm not sure).

Cheers, Wilhelm Schuster.

Re: [arch-general] mdmonitor.service /usr/lib/systemd/scripts/mdadm_env.sh: No such file or directory

[David C. Rankin]

On 06/05/2016 07:43 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
> On 06/05/2016 06:12 PM, David N Murray via arch-general wrote:
>> I don't think it's any problem at all.  I've always had this message and 
>> mdadm
>> starts and runs fine.  I think this has been discussed on the list before.  
>> It's
>> an optional file, but generates an ugly message.
>>
>> https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=183122 (#10)
>>
>> HTH,
>> Dave
> 
> Thank you Dave,
> 
>   It does indeed run fine:
> 
> [17:21 valhalla:/home/david] # sc status mdmonitor
> ● mdmonitor.service - MD array monitor
>Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/mdmonitor.service; static; vendor
> preset: disabled)
>Active: active (running) since Sun 2016-06-05 17:12:47 CDT; 23min ago
>   Process: 454 ExecStartPre=/usr/lib/systemd/scripts/mdadm_env.sh 
> (code=exited,
> status=203/EXEC)
>  Main PID: 460 (mdadm)
> Tasks: 1 (limit: 512)
>CGroup: /system.slice/mdmonitor.service
>└─460 /sbin/mdadm --monitor --scan
> 
> Jun 05 17:12:47 valhalla systemd[1]: Starting MD array monitor...
> Jun 05 17:12:47 valhalla systemd[1]: Started MD array monitor.
> 
>   Just seems strange we wouldn't at least have a stub script for
> /usr/lib/systemd/scripts/mdadm_env.sh to get rid of the boot message. Oh well,
> I'll post to the mdraid list and see what the devs have to say. Thanks again
> 

Now we have a conundrum, the mdadm folks seem to think the missing file is an
Arch problem:

(from linux-r...@vger.kernel.org, contributing redhat dev):

On 06/07/2016 02:31 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> "David C. Rankin"  writes:
>> Neil, All,
>>
>>   I'm chasing down the reason there is no
>> /usr/lib/systemd/scripts/mdadm_env.sh provided with mdadm. This is
>> more a curiosity really as mdmonitor continues to run, but it always
>> throws an error at boot:
>>
>> Jun 05 17:12:47 valhalla systemd[454]: mdmonitor.service: Failed at step EXEC
>> spawning /usr/lib/systemd/scripts/mdadm_env.sh: No such file or directory
>>
>>   I have several Arch servers, all on mdadm 3.4-1. I ran into an issue
>> a year or so ago with a boot error with mdmonitor due to my failure to
>> provide MAILADDR in /etc/mdadm.com, but that has long since been
>> corrected:
>
> If you're running Arch Linux, you probably want to direct this question
> to the Arch Linux maintainers.
>
> Jes
>

So is this something that needs to be filed as a bug here. The package is
certainly missing something. The mdmonitor.service file is pointing to a file
that does not exist in the package. What say the Arch devs?

-- 
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

Re: [arch-general] ML is being sent to Spam by Gmail

[Florian Pritz via arch-general]

On 08.06.2016 17:18, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote:
> In one, I see:
> Authentication-Results: luna.archlinux.org;
> dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key)
> header.d=dray-be.20150623.gappssmtp.com
> header.i=@dray-be.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b=lZvs/tYM

That's weird, but it's difficult to tell what part of the mail changed.
I'm also not sure when that header is being generated. Opendkim doesn't
seem to verify mails consistently for me and so far I haven't managed to
figure out why because debugging features also don't seem to work properly.

> In another, I see the line:
> Authentication-Results: luna.archlinux.org; dkim=none

Well, that's entirely fine. Not everyone supports DKIM.

> I noticed that. It is slightly frustrating since most things seem to
> come from the mailing list rather than the original sender...

That is unfortunate indeed, but there is really no good solutions to
this apart from not changing the mail in any way which is also not a
good solution for us given people rely on the way our lists behave
(subject prefix, reply-to).

Mailman has an option to wrap messages into a new message which might
fix this problem, but I'd first have to investigate client support and
test that feature.

As I posted in another part of this thread, I've switched gmail.com
delivery to IPv4. Let's see if that changes anything.

Florian



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] ML is being sent to Spam by Gmail

[Florian Pritz via arch-general]

On 08.06.2016 11:18, Maarten de Vries wrote:
> ​Gmail imposes more strict checks on email coming in over IPv6, with​
> the rationale that IPv6 enabled machines are more modern and thus should
> be configured properly for newer verification techniques.

Now that is something I totally missed when I read their guidelines, but
it certainly sounds like it could be the cause of these problems. I have
just switched the server to deliver mails to gmail.com (only that
domain, no others) via IPv4. Please tell me if you see any improvement
during the next few days.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] DKMS question around removal of kernel modules

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 14:03:18 -0400, Genes Lists via arch-general wrote:
>Is there a way to mark the deletion to happen after the new
>kernel is booted ? 
>
>I may well be missing something of course.

What you're missing is, that the directory names in /lib/modules/
differ, but not the kernel names in /boot/.

$ ls -Ggh /boot/vm*
-rw-r--r-- 1 4.3M May 11 22:23 /boot/vmlinuz-linux
-rw-r--r-- 1 4.4M Nov 18  2015 /boot/vmlinuz-linux-rt
-rw-r--r-- 1 4.0M Nov 27  2014 /boot/vmlinuz-linux-rt-lts

If you upgrade the new kernel has got the file name "vmlinuz-linux*",
too, so the old kernel must be removed first. However, this could be
done without running dkms remove, IOW keeping the directory of the old
kernel in /lib/modules/ is possible, but then dkms remove fails
later, after the old kernel is removed. By this approach you later need
to tidy up /var/lib/dkms/ and /lib/modules/ with the rm command.

If the kernel file names in /boot/ would differ, then it would require
to manually remove old kernels and to handle links or to edit boot
loader configs. Arch Linux users not necessarily install GRUB2 by their
Arch installs and even if they would, they not necessarily want to
allow that the config is edited automatically.

It doesn't harm to at least install two different kinds of kernels
(e.g. mainline and longterm) and to add at least one kernel to IgnorePkg
in /etc/pacman.conf and to upgrade this kernel only, after another
kernel was successfully used. So there usually is no reason to collect
several versions of the same kind of kernel and the approach that the
file names in /boot/ don't differ is usually wanted. IMO it's not an
issue to reboot, if a kernel was upgraded and additional modules need
to be loaded, that were removed for the currently running kernel. If a
reboot would be an issue, then upgrading the kernel later might be the
better approach, IOW adding all installed kernels to IgnorePkg could
solve this issue.

Regards,
Ralf

Re: [arch-general] DKMS question around removal of kernel modules

[Eli Schwartz via arch-general]

On 06/08/2016 02:03 PM, Genes Lists via arch-general wrote:
> When I install a new kernel, I notice that DKMS removes previous kernel
> modules as well as adding them to the new kernel.
> 
> In the real old days these were not removed at all - so removal is a
> good thing.
> The issue is that the old kernel is still running and until machine is
> rebooted the modules wont be available I would think.
> I wonder - Is there a way to mark the deletion to happen after the new
> kernel is booted ? 
> 
> I may well be missing something of course.

Well, you'd think it would be nice if the actual kernel itself wasn't
removed until the machine is rebooted. Because not all the modules you
need were installed with dkms -- most of them come together with the
kernel. ;)

Note that any modules which are already loaded will be available, you
just can't modprobe a module that no longer exists on disk.

...

There is actually a task on the bugtracker for keeping old kernels:
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/16702

This is probably the best solution -- also, I'm not sure how you'd get
rid of dkms modules after the fact, without a way of keeping track of
which modules are orphaned. That's kind of why the old service was
switched to a pacman hook in the first place.


-- 
Eli Schwartz

Re: [arch-general] DKMS question around removal of kernel modules

[Bruno Pagani]

Le 08/06/2016 à 20:03, Genes Lists via arch-general a écrit :

> When I install a new kernel, I notice that DKMS removes previous kernel
> modules as well as adding them to the new kernel.
>
> In the real old days these were not removed at all - so removal is a
> good thing.
> The issue is that the old kernel is still running and until machine is
> rebooted the modules wont be available I would think.
> I wonder - Is there a way to mark the deletion to happen after the new
> kernel is booted ? 
>
> I may well be missing something of course.
>
> Installed 4.6.2 kernel  while 4.6.1 running - pacman says:
>
>  (1/1) Remove DKMS modules 
> ==> dkms -q remove -q -m vboxguest -v 5.0.20_OSE -k 4.6.1-2-ARCH
>
> ==> dkms -q remove -q -m vboxhost -v 5.0.20_OSE -k 4.6.1-2-ARCH
>
> ...==> dkms -q install -m vboxguest -v 5.0.20_OSE -k 4.6.2-1-ARCH
>
> ==> dkms -q install -m vboxhost -v 5.0.20_OSE -k 4.6.2-1-ARCH
>
> ...
>
>
> Thanks for any thoughts.
>
> gene

That’s expected, and in fact the same thing happens for normal kernel
module. I don’t see why DKMS module should be treated differently. ;)

Bruno



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[arch-general] DKMS question around removal of kernel modules

[Genes Lists via arch-general]

When I install a new kernel, I notice that DKMS removes previous kernel
modules as well as adding them to the new kernel.

In the real old days these were not removed at all - so removal is a
good thing.
The issue is that the old kernel is still running and until machine is
rebooted the modules wont be available I would think.
I wonder - Is there a way to mark the deletion to happen after the new
kernel is booted ? 

I may well be missing something of course.

Installed 4.6.2 kernel  while 4.6.1 running - pacman says:

 (1/1) Remove DKMS modules 
==> dkms -q remove -q -m vboxguest -v 5.0.20_OSE -k 4.6.1-2-ARCH

==> dkms -q remove -q -m vboxhost -v 5.0.20_OSE -k 4.6.1-2-ARCH

...==> dkms -q install -m vboxguest -v 5.0.20_OSE -k 4.6.2-1-ARCH

==> dkms -q install -m vboxhost -v 5.0.20_OSE -k 4.6.2-1-ARCH

...


Thanks for any thoughts.

gene

Re: [arch-general] ML is being sent to Spam by Gmail

[Ben Oliver via arch-general]

I have been meaning to write here about this issue too, 70% of ML stuff has
been going straight to spam.

A way to quickly create filters is to click the little drop down arrow at
the top
of the message, next to the 'to Foo'. Next to the 'mailing list:' title,
there's a button
that says 'filter messages from this mailing list'.

Re: [arch-general] ML is being sent to Spam by Gmail

[Eli Schwartz via arch-general]

On 06/08/2016 04:55 AM, Florian Pritz via arch-general wrote:
> On 08.06.2016 06:26, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote:
>> dkim header remarks indicate either failed or missing dkim sigs for
>> those messages.
> 
> That's weird. For me the signatures very just fine. Could you show me
> the exact error you get (assuming there is one)?


In one, I see:
Authentication-Results: luna.archlinux.org;
dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key)
header.d=dray-be.20150623.gappssmtp.com
header.i=@dray-be.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b=lZvs/tYM

In another, I see the line:
Authentication-Results: luna.archlinux.org; dkim=none

> Maybe also run the full mail (source, including headers) through
> `opendkim-testmsg` (part of the opendkim package)? If there is no error,
> the mail verifies fine.

I did try that, by saving the email(s) from Thunderbird. It matches what
I'd expect from the Authentication-Results header.

[eschwartz@arch ~]$ cat /tmp/Re\:\ \[aur-general\]\ afraiddns-git\
PKGBUILD\:\ review\ and\ criticism\ welcome.eml | opendkim-testmsg
opendkim-testmsg: dkim_eom(): Bad signature

[eschwartz@arch ~]$ cat /tmp/\[aur-general\]\ Updating\ MATE\
Packages.eml |opendkim-testmsg
opendkim-testmsg: dkim_chunk(): No signature


> Also missing DKIM signatures are not our fault and FWIW a missing
> signature should not cause mails to go to spam. An invalid signature
> also shouldn't unless there is a DMARC policy for that domain that
> states so. archlinux.org currently doesn't publish a DMARC policy so the
> default of letting everything through applies.

Correlation does not imply causation. On the other hand, I know very
little about mail protocols so I am just floating suggestions and hoping
someone who knows more than I can find the answer. :)
I did not check every email.

> We do change the From address of any mail that uses DMARC though and
> resign the mail with our key so that signatures for those mails are
> valid. Since we change the From address, the DMARC policy of the
> original sender no longer matters.

I noticed that. It is slightly frustrating since most things seem to
come from the mailing list rather than the original sender...

> I don't know if gmail provides any information as to why they classify a
> specific mail as spam, but if they do, please show me. If they do not,
> please send me all the headers of one mail that has been delivered to
> spam so I can check them for possible problems.

"Why is this message in Spam? It's similar to messages that were
detected by our spam filters.  Learn more"

So, no. :(

Pastebins of the two emails I have referenced here:
http://pastebin.com/raw/v249MDTC
http://pastebin.com/raw/gW4gJtXZ

> Do the mails that go to spam have anything in common? Do they all
> contain links or are they all sent by users from a specific domain? For
> mails where we change the From address, the old address appears is added
> to CC so check that as well.
> 
> Florian
> 

Well, none of them have had the From address changed (although there are
some which do not get changed which were not sent to Spam, so I don't
know if that means anything).

And some users have sent emails that go to Spam as well as emails that
do not go to Spam.
Two users whose email went to spam use gmail.com addresses.

-- 
Eli Schwartz

Re: [arch-general] ML is being sent to Spam by Gmail

[Dragon ryu via arch-general]

also, word checking as well.
2016/06/08 18:18 "Maarten de Vries via arch-general" <
arch-general@archlinux.org>:

> On 8 June 2016 at 10:55, Florian Pritz via arch-general <
> arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
>
> > On 08.06.2016 06:26, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote:
> > > dkim header remarks indicate either failed or missing dkim sigs for
> > > those messages.
> >
> > That's weird. For me the signatures very just fine. Could you show me
> > the exact error you get (assuming there is one)?
> >
> > Maybe also run the full mail (source, including headers) through
> > `opendkim-testmsg` (part of the opendkim package)? If there is no error,
> > the mail verifies fine.
> >
> > Also missing DKIM signatures are not our fault and FWIW a missing
> > signature should not cause mails to go to spam. An invalid signature
> > also shouldn't unless there is a DMARC policy for that domain that
> > states so. archlinux.org currently doesn't publish a DMARC policy so the
> > default of letting everything through applies.
> >
> > We do change the From address of any mail that uses DMARC though and
> > resign the mail with our key so that signatures for those mails are
> > valid. Since we change the From address, the DMARC policy of the
> > original sender no longer matters.
> >
> > I don't know if gmail provides any information as to why they classify a
> > specific mail as spam, but if they do, please show me. If they do not,
> > please send me all the headers of one mail that has been delivered to
> > spam so I can check them for possible problems.
> >
>
> ​Gmail imposes more strict checks on email coming in over IPv6, with​ the
> rationale that IPv6 enabled machines are more modern and thus should be
> configured properly for newer verification techniques. Of course, for a
> mailinglist this does not fly since it does not generate the messages
> itself. See also [1], specifically "Additional guidelines for IPv6".
>
> So... A stupid but possibly pragmatic approach is to use IPv4 when relaying
> email to gmail.
>
> [1] https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126
>

Re: [arch-general] ML is being sent to Spam by Gmail

[Maarten de Vries via arch-general]

On 8 June 2016 at 10:55, Florian Pritz via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:

> On 08.06.2016 06:26, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote:
> > dkim header remarks indicate either failed or missing dkim sigs for
> > those messages.
>
> That's weird. For me the signatures very just fine. Could you show me
> the exact error you get (assuming there is one)?
>
> Maybe also run the full mail (source, including headers) through
> `opendkim-testmsg` (part of the opendkim package)? If there is no error,
> the mail verifies fine.
>
> Also missing DKIM signatures are not our fault and FWIW a missing
> signature should not cause mails to go to spam. An invalid signature
> also shouldn't unless there is a DMARC policy for that domain that
> states so. archlinux.org currently doesn't publish a DMARC policy so the
> default of letting everything through applies.
>
> We do change the From address of any mail that uses DMARC though and
> resign the mail with our key so that signatures for those mails are
> valid. Since we change the From address, the DMARC policy of the
> original sender no longer matters.
>
> I don't know if gmail provides any information as to why they classify a
> specific mail as spam, but if they do, please show me. If they do not,
> please send me all the headers of one mail that has been delivered to
> spam so I can check them for possible problems.
>

​Gmail imposes more strict checks on email coming in over IPv6, with​ the
rationale that IPv6 enabled machines are more modern and thus should be
configured properly for newer verification techniques. Of course, for a
mailinglist this does not fly since it does not generate the messages
itself. See also [1], specifically "Additional guidelines for IPv6".

So... A stupid but possibly pragmatic approach is to use IPv4 when relaying
email to gmail.

[1] https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126

Re: [arch-general] ML is being sent to Spam by Gmail

[G. Schlisio]

Am 08.06.2016 um 10:34 schrieb Pierre Neidhardt via arch-general:

> On 16-06-08 14:49:14, Syrone Wong via arch-general wrote:

>> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Sri Krishna via arch-general

dear pierre, syrone and Srikrishna, please respect the new community
code of conduct and stop top posting [0].
thank you!

[0] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Code_of_conduct#Top_posting



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] ML is being sent to Spam by Gmail

[Pierre Neidhardt via arch-general]

Hi,

Same issue here: For the last few weeks I got plenty of e-mails from the Arch
MLs sent to spam.

Since I've tweaked Gmail's filters it seems to be OK now.

On 16-06-08 14:49:14, Syrone Wong via arch-general wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> You can add a filter in gmail, set
> `list:"arch-general@archlinux.org"` to match the exact email address
> and click "Never send it to Spam".
> 
> Enjoy.
> Best Regards,
> Syrone Wong
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Sri Krishna via arch-general
>  wrote:
> > I am also seeing many more emails from this mailing list go to the spam
> > folder in GMail (a few every week).
> >
> > I'm don't know how to check the DKIM information though.
> >
> > Srikrishna Sekhar
> >
> >
> > On 8 June 2016 at 11:34, Henrik Danielsson via arch-general <
> > arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
> >
> >> 2016-06-08 6:26 GMT+02:00 Eli Schwartz via arch-general <
> >> arch-general@archlinux.org>:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > dkim header remarks indicate either failed or missing dkim sigs for
> >> > those messages.
> >> >
> >> > Is anyone else seeing this behavior change?
> >> >
> >> I didn't look very long but i could only find one message from this list in
> >> my Gmail spam folder. (About a missing GPG key 5 days ago.)
> >> The DKIM result on that one was just "none", but it got a -1.3 (minimum 5
> >> needed) spam rating so I guess that's why it was shot down.
> >> At work we have had problems with regular messages (including those from
> >> Google) ending up being tagged spam though.
> >>

Re: [arch-general] Update delayed for more of two months, Lyx v2.1.4

[Jelle van der Waa]

On 06/07/16 at 08:54pm, Xavier Corredor Llano via arch-general wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> Again the maintainer of Lyx [1] is so delay for update this package,  here 
> [2] is the pkgbuild 
> updated and tested, can any TUs update this?

Only developers have access to the extra repo.

> 
> Thanks
> 
> [1]: https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/lyx/
> [2]: PKGBUILD[1] 
> 
> -- 
> Xavier Corredor Llano
> 
> On Saturday, 24 October 2015 11:19:54 COT Antonio Rojas wrote:
> > Xavier Corredor Llano wrote:
> > > Hi guys,
> > > 
> > > After more than two months ago Lyx [1] released the version 2.1.4 [2],
> > > this is a minor and maintenance release (strongly recommended), in august,
> > > and after flagged as out-date and wait some days, I contacted with the
> > > maintainer (Ronald) and he didn't answer me (I understand, maybe he is
> > > busy)
> > > 
> > > I tested for more of two months and this release work fine, I would like
> > > to be the maintainer of this package but I am not TU.
> > > 
> > > Regards
> > > 
> > > [1] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/lyx/
> > > [2] http://www.lyx.org/News
> > 
> > Updated
> 
> 
> 
> [1] 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2KQf7Dbx7DUM2MtaXBxb3kzY0k/view?usp=drivesdk

-- 
Jelle van der Waa


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [arch-general] ML is being sent to Spam by Gmail

[Syrone Wong via arch-general]

Hi,

You can add a filter in gmail, set
`list:"arch-general@archlinux.org"` to match the exact email address
and click "Never send it to Spam".

Enjoy.
Best Regards,
Syrone Wong


On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Sri Krishna via arch-general
 wrote:
> I am also seeing many more emails from this mailing list go to the spam
> folder in GMail (a few every week).
>
> I'm don't know how to check the DKIM information though.
>
> Srikrishna Sekhar
>
>
> On 8 June 2016 at 11:34, Henrik Danielsson via arch-general <
> arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> 2016-06-08 6:26 GMT+02:00 Eli Schwartz via arch-general <
>> arch-general@archlinux.org>:
>> >
>> >
>> > dkim header remarks indicate either failed or missing dkim sigs for
>> > those messages.
>> >
>> > Is anyone else seeing this behavior change?
>> >
>> I didn't look very long but i could only find one message from this list in
>> my Gmail spam folder. (About a missing GPG key 5 days ago.)
>> The DKIM result on that one was just "none", but it got a -1.3 (minimum 5
>> needed) spam rating so I guess that's why it was shot down.
>> At work we have had problems with regular messages (including those from
>> Google) ending up being tagged spam though.
>>

Re: [arch-general] ML is being sent to Spam by Gmail

[Sri Krishna via arch-general]

I am also seeing many more emails from this mailing list go to the spam
folder in GMail (a few every week).

I'm don't know how to check the DKIM information though.

Srikrishna Sekhar


On 8 June 2016 at 11:34, Henrik Danielsson via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org> wrote:

> 2016-06-08 6:26 GMT+02:00 Eli Schwartz via arch-general <
> arch-general@archlinux.org>:
> >
> >
> > dkim header remarks indicate either failed or missing dkim sigs for
> > those messages.
> >
> > Is anyone else seeing this behavior change?
> >
> I didn't look very long but i could only find one message from this list in
> my Gmail spam folder. (About a missing GPG key 5 days ago.)
> The DKIM result on that one was just "none", but it got a -1.3 (minimum 5
> needed) spam rating so I guess that's why it was shot down.
> At work we have had problems with regular messages (including those from
> Google) ending up being tagged spam though.
>

Re: [arch-general] ML is being sent to Spam by Gmail

[Henrik Danielsson via arch-general]

2016-06-08 6:26 GMT+02:00 Eli Schwartz via arch-general <
arch-general@archlinux.org>:
>
>
> dkim header remarks indicate either failed or missing dkim sigs for
> those messages.
>
> Is anyone else seeing this behavior change?
>
I didn't look very long but i could only find one message from this list in
my Gmail spam folder. (About a missing GPG key 5 days ago.)
The DKIM result on that one was just "none", but it got a -1.3 (minimum 5
needed) spam rating so I guess that's why it was shot down.
At work we have had problems with regular messages (including those from
Google) ending up being tagged spam though.