Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 12:00:38PM +0200, Francisco Castillo wrote: Yesterday i decide to move /var/mail folder to /mnt/var/mail where i has another partition but this has caused to stop working my mail system. In order to do this i do cp /var/mail/* /mnt/var/mail this is the cause of your problems. plain cp will copy the files, but they will be owned by the current user (root, most likely), and permissions will be set according to the current umask. try cp -a instead. this copies the files AND preserves ownership and permissions. -a will also recurse subdirectories. e.g. cp -a /var/mail /mnt/var NOTE: stop postfix and your POP/IMAP daemons before copying and restart them afterwards. you don't want new mail to arrive or old mail to be deleted while the copy is in progress. in fact, you don't want either of those things to happen until you're sure that the changes are working without problem. craig -- craig sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] The next time you vote, remember that Regime change begins at home -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
problem with /var/mail and procmail
Hello, I has a server with debian woody + postfix + amavis + procmail to local delivery Yesterday i decide to move /var/mail folder to /mnt/var/mail where i has another partition but this has caused to stop working my mail system. In order to do this i do cp /var/mail/* /mnt/var/mail mv /var/mail /var/mail_back cd /var ; ln -s /mnt/var/mail mail then i see that i has problems with qpopper checking the users files and decide to do a rollback with cd /var ; rm mail mv mail_back mail reboot but then the postfix server has problems to deliver local mail to /var/mail ( i think the problem could be in amavis + procmail system). I has not seen errors in mail.err, mail.warn, mail.info, system.log, messages.log I only has seen in mail.info relay=vscan, delay=344, status=deferred (temporary failure) when postfix try to deliver localy a mail to the /var/mail/user file. I´m stopped now please help, Thanks in advance. Francisco Castillo.
Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail
Am 2004-09-27 12:00:38, schrieb Francisco Castillo: Hello, I has a server with debian woody + postfix + amavis + procmail to local delivery Yesterday i decide to move /var/mail folder to /mnt/var/mail where i has another partition but this has caused to stop working my mail system. In order to do this i do cp /var/mail/* /mnt/var/mail mv /var/mail /var/mail_back cd /var ; ln -s /mnt/var/mail mail Why do you do that ? Better is: mount new_partiotion/ /mnt cp /var/mail/* /mnt umount /mnt mount new_partition /var/mail My OLD mailserver has: hda1 250 MB / hda2 250 MB SWAP hda3 1.000 MB /tmp hda5 500 MB /usr hda6 250 MB /var hda7 1.250 MB /var/log hda876.000 MB /var/mail This works quiet well... and you can LVM hda8 how you want. Thanks in advance. Francisco Castillo. Greetings Michelle -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi 0033/3/8845235667100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail
Francisco Castillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: cp /var/mail/* /mnt/var/mail mv /var/mail /var/mail_back cd /var ; ln -s /mnt/var/mail mail Do it like this: mount --bind /mnt/var/mail/ /var/mail/ cd /var ; rm mail mv mail_back mail reboot but then the postfix server has problems to deliver local mail to /var/mail ( i think the problem could be in amavis + procmail system). Are the permissions OK? Mine are: drwxrwsr-x 2 root mail96 2004-09-27 08:19 mail -- Miernik _ xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___/__ tel: +427 __/ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Why software shouldn't be covered by patents http://bladeenc.mp3.no/articles/software_patents.html
Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail
Le lundi 27 septembre 2004 à 12:00, Francisco Castillo écrivait: I only has seen in mail.info relay=vscan, delay=344, status=deferred (temporary failure) when postfix try to deliver localy a mail to the /var/mail/user file. Please check the permissions of /var/mail. It must be something like that: drwxrwsr-x 2 root mail 44 2004-09-27 12:17 /var/mail -- BOFH excuse #66: bit bucket overflow
Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail
Hi In order to do this i do cp /var/mail/* /mnt/var/mail mv /var/mail /var/mail_back cd /var ; ln -s /mnt/var/mail mail [..] cd /var ; rm mail mv mail_back mail reboot Did you chmod/chown these directores? mv does not move parent UID/GID and mod's. -- I greet Wieslaw
RE: problem with /var/mail and procmail
Hello, I has forget to say that the permisions where drwxrwsr-x when first was in error. Then i do a chmod 777 but the problem go on. But what is the chmod command in order to restore the drwxrwsr-x, but this will not be the solution, as i explain above. Thanks in advance. -Mensaje original- De: Aurélien Beaujean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviado el: lunes, 27 de septiembre de 2004 12:25 Para: debian-isp@lists.debian.org Asunto: Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail Le lundi 27 septembre 2004 à 12:00, Francisco Castillo écrivait: I only has seen in mail.info relay=vscan, delay=344, status=deferred (temporary failure) when postfix try to deliver localy a mail to the /var/mail/user file. Please check the permissions of /var/mail. It must be something like that: drwxrwsr-x 2 root mail 44 2004-09-27 12:17 /var/mail -- BOFH excuse #66: bit bucket overflow -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: problem with /var/mail and procmail
No, i did not chmod this directories, i only do a mv realy and the problem go on. Then i has do a chmod 777 and i now i has do a chmod g+s mail but the problem goes on. Francisco. -Mensaje original- De: Wieslaw [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviado el: lunes, 27 de septiembre de 2004 12:44 Para: Francisco Castillo CC: debian-isp@lists.debian.org Asunto: Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail Hi In order to do this i do cp /var/mail/* /mnt/var/mail mv /var/mail /var/mail_back cd /var ; ln -s /mnt/var/mail mail [..] cd /var ; rm mail mv mail_back mail reboot Did you chmod/chown these directores? mv does not move parent UID/GID and mod's. -- I greet Wieslaw
RE: problem with /var/mail and procmail
Hey, i has investigated more: The /mnt/var/ was an old partition (from a mandrake with another /etc/passwd distint from now) when i do a ln -s /mnt/var/mail i has relationed the /mnt/var partition and the partition from debian in a way that the /var folder of the debian partition has change and belongs to the come_vie user and not to the root user, and the same has happended insite the /var folder, it seems that this problem has made to crash some of my systems, the postfix procmail, the squirred webmail, Is there a command to solve this problem? could it be a chmod root /var - R ? I has trying some things like that, I has do work the squirred.. Thanks in advance. -Mensaje original- De: Francisco Castillo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviado el: lunes, 27 de septiembre de 2004 13:28 Para: debian-isp@lists.debian.org Asunto: RE: problem with /var/mail and procmail No, i did not chmod this directories, i only do a mv realy and the problem go on. Then i has do a chmod 777 and i now i has do a chmod g+s mail but the problem goes on. Francisco. -Mensaje original- De: Wieslaw [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviado el: lunes, 27 de septiembre de 2004 12:44 Para: Francisco Castillo CC: debian-isp@lists.debian.org Asunto: Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail Hi In order to do this i do cp /var/mail/* /mnt/var/mail mv /var/mail /var/mail_back cd /var ; ln -s /mnt/var/mail mail [..] cd /var ; rm mail mv mail_back mail reboot Did you chmod/chown these directores? mv does not move parent UID/GID and mod's. -- I greet Wieslaw
Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail
Am 2004-09-27 13:09:33, schrieb Francisco Castillo: Hello, I has forget to say that the permisions where drwxrwsr-x when first was in error. Then i do a chmod 777 but the problem go on. But what is the chmod command in order to restore the drwxrwsr-x, but this will not be the solution, as i explain above. chmod 2777 Thanks in advance. Greetings Michelle -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi 0033/3/8845235667100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
RE: problem with /var/mail and procmail
Hello, there are more: The user come_vie has the id 660, this user was in /var/lib/dpkg where i has see there were postfix files, i has chown root dpkg -R , but the problem goes on. I has no found more come_vie files owner, but i think there could be more, Do you know what is still stopping my mail service? What are this files come_vie ? PD. I has restarted postfix, but is not the solution. Thanks in advance. -Mensaje original- De: Michelle Konzack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviado el: lunes, 27 de septiembre de 2004 14:03 Para: debian-isp@lists.debian.org Asunto: Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail Am 2004-09-27 13:09:33, schrieb Francisco Castillo: Hello, I has forget to say that the permisions where drwxrwsr-x when first was in error. Then i do a chmod 777 but the problem go on. But what is the chmod command in order to restore the drwxrwsr-x, but this will not be the solution, as i explain above. chmod 2777 Thanks in advance. Greetings Michelle -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi 0033/3/8845235667100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail
Hi... when i do a ln -s /mnt/var/mail i has relationed the /mnt/var partition and the partition from debian in a way that the /var folder of the debian partition has change and belongs to the come_vie user and not to the root user, and the same has happended insite the /var folder, it seems that this problem has made to crash some of my systems, the postfix procmail, the squirred webmail, You should check user's (id login). I don't know with id mandrake have, but ls -la show everyting :) Is there a command to solve this problem? could it be a chmod root /var - R ? I has trying some things like that, I has do work the squirred.. I think not. -- I greet Wieslaw
Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail
Hello Francisco, Am 2004-09-27 14:11:17, schrieb Francisco Castillo: Hello, there are more: The user come_vie has the id 660, this user was in /var/lib/dpkg where i has see there were postfix files, i has chown root dpkg -R , but the problem goes on. I has no found more come_vie files owner, but i think there could be more, Do you know what is still stopping my mail service? What are this files come_vie ? I do not know, but WHY not mounting the patition directly in /var/mail. This will solv all problems... PD. I has restarted postfix, but is not the solution. Thanks in advance. Greetings Michelle -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi 0033/3/8845235667100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) signature.pgp Description: Digital signature
Re: problem with /var/mail and procmail
Hello, I has reinstaled postfix and this seems to work. I restore another applications with files in /var too. Thanks. Hello Francisco, Am 2004-09-27 14:11:17, schrieb Francisco Castillo: Hello, there are more: The user come_vie has the id 660, this user was in /var/lib/dpkg where i has see there were postfix files, i has chown root dpkg -R , but the problem goes on. I has no found more come_vie files owner, but i think there could be more, Do you know what is still stopping my mail service? What are this files come_vie ? I do not know, but WHY not mounting the patition directly in /var/mail. This will solv all problems... PD. I has restarted postfix, but is not the solution. Thanks in advance. Greetings Michelle -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886 50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi 0033/3/8845235667100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com) Saludos, Francisco Castillo. email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.irccrawler.com
Procmail | Maildrop ownership
Hi.
I am trying to set up a custom behaviour for a spam blocking mail server,
where the mail get redirected to a custom Spam folder in the user's
Maildir folder.
Everything is working fine, except that, when procmail delivers the
message, the ownership is wrongly set to root:
# cat /etc/procmailrc
PATH=/bin:/usr/bin
LOGFILE=$HOME/procmaillog
DEFAULT=$HOME/Maildir/
:0fw: spamassassin.lock
* 256000
| spamc -f -u $LOGNAME
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
$DEFAULT/.Spam/
EOF
# ls -la ~user/Maildir/.Spam/new/
drwx--2 user user 4096 Mar 12 09:56 .
drwx--5 user user 4096 Mar 12 09:56 ..
-rw---1 root mail 4460 Mar 12 09:37
1079095066.4158_2.ares
-rw---1 root mail 8619 Mar 12 09:56
1079096151.4216_2.ares
I suppose this ownership setting is ok for a mbox store, not for a Maildir
format, since the user isnt able to read or modify that message.
So, how can I make procmail deliver that message correctly? I could make
a script to do that, instead of using the redirection to .Spam/, but is
there a nicer way to do that?
I also had problems making an alternative maildrop sollution. The issue is
that maildrop's xfilter command wont work if the recipient user doesnt
have a valid shell:
# cat /etc/maildroprc
DEFAULT=$HOME/Maildir
# exception commented so I could see the error log
#exception {
xfilter /usr/bin/spamc -f -u $RECIPIENT
#}
if (/^X-Spam-Flag: YES/)
{
to Maildir/.Spam
}
EOF
It would work fine, except that when the recipient user does not have a
valid shell account, it exists with the following error (when I am not
using the 'exception' block):
BAF555886: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=local, delay=0, status=deferred
(temporary failure. Command output: maildrop: error writing to filter.
/usr/bin/maildrop: Unable to filter message. )
I suppose xfilter calls the user's shell. Is there any other way to filter
messages without this requirement?
Is using an 'smtp' content filter in the MTA (postfix) a better option?
The sollutions I've seen use 'spamassassin' instead of 'spamc', that is
the method I prefer...
Thanks in advance,
Yves
--
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Procmail | Maildrop ownership
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 11:24:50AM -0300, Yves Junqueira wrote:
Hi.
I am trying to set up a custom behaviour for a spam blocking mail server,
where the mail get redirected to a custom Spam folder in the user's
Maildir folder.
Everything is working fine, except that, when procmail delivers the
message, the ownership is wrongly set to root:
How is procmail invoked? What versions of what software is involved?
I use postfix 2.0.16, and /etc/postfix/main.cf contains this line:
mailbox_command = procmail -a $EXTENSION
Then procmail will run as the recipient.
I don't use global /etc/procmailrc , but .procmailrc in homedir instead.
# cat /etc/procmailrc
PATH=/bin:/usr/bin
LOGFILE=$HOME/procmaillog
DEFAULT=$HOME/Maildir/
:0fw: spamassassin.lock
* 256000
| spamc -f -u $LOGNAME
What version of spamassasin are you running?
I use 2.63, and have ommittef the -u flag, spamc runs as the same user as parent
(procmail)
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
$DEFAULT/.Spam/
EOF
# ls -la ~user/Maildir/.Spam/new/
drwx--2 user user 4096 Mar 12 09:56 .
drwx--5 user user 4096 Mar 12 09:56 ..
-rw---1 root mail 4460 Mar 12 09:37
1079095066.4158_2.ares
-rw---1 root mail 8619 Mar 12 09:56
1079096151.4216_2.ares
I suppose this ownership setting is ok for a mbox store, not for a Maildir
format, since the user isnt able to read or modify that message.
So, how can I make procmail deliver that message correctly? I could make
a script to do that, instead of using the redirection to .Spam/, but is
there a nicer way to do that?
I also had problems making an alternative maildrop sollution. The issue is
that maildrop's xfilter command wont work if the recipient user doesnt
have a valid shell:
# cat /etc/maildroprc
DEFAULT=$HOME/Maildir
# exception commented so I could see the error log
#exception {
xfilter /usr/bin/spamc -f -u $RECIPIENT
#}
if (/^X-Spam-Flag: YES/)
{
to Maildir/.Spam
}
EOF
It would work fine, except that when the recipient user does not have a
valid shell account, it exists with the following error (when I am not
using the 'exception' block):
BAF555886: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=local, delay=0, status=deferred
(temporary failure. Command output: maildrop: error writing to filter.
/usr/bin/maildrop: Unable to filter message. )
I suppose xfilter calls the user's shell. Is there any other way to filter
messages without this requirement?
Is using an 'smtp' content filter in the MTA (postfix) a better option?
The sollutions I've seen use 'spamassassin' instead of 'spamc', that is
the method I prefer...
Thanks in advance,
Yves
--
Frode Haugsgjerd
Norway
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Procmail | Maildrop ownership
Hi.
I am trying to set up a custom behaviour for a spam blocking mail server,
where the mail get redirected to a custom Spam folder in the user's
Maildir folder.
Everything is working fine, except that, when procmail delivers the
message, the ownership is wrongly set to root:
# cat /etc/procmailrc
PATH=/bin:/usr/bin
LOGFILE=$HOME/procmaillog
DEFAULT=$HOME/Maildir/
:0fw: spamassassin.lock
* 256000
| spamc -f -u $LOGNAME
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
$DEFAULT/.Spam/
EOF
# ls -la ~user/Maildir/.Spam/new/
drwx--2 user user 4096 Mar 12 09:56 .
drwx--5 user user 4096 Mar 12 09:56 ..
-rw---1 root mail 4460 Mar 12 09:37
1079095066.4158_2.ares
-rw---1 root mail 8619 Mar 12 09:56
1079096151.4216_2.ares
I suppose this ownership setting is ok for a mbox store, not for a Maildir
format, since the user isnt able to read or modify that message.
So, how can I make procmail deliver that message correctly? I could make
a script to do that, instead of using the redirection to .Spam/, but is
there a nicer way to do that?
I also had problems making an alternative maildrop sollution. The issue is
that maildrop's xfilter command wont work if the recipient user doesnt
have a valid shell:
# cat /etc/maildroprc
DEFAULT=$HOME/Maildir
# exception commented so I could see the error log
#exception {
xfilter /usr/bin/spamc -f -u $RECIPIENT
#}
if (/^X-Spam-Flag: YES/)
{
to Maildir/.Spam
}
EOF
It would work fine, except that when the recipient user does not have a
valid shell account, it exists with the following error (when I am not
using the 'exception' block):
BAF555886: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=local, delay=0, status=deferred
(temporary failure. Command output: maildrop: error writing to filter.
/usr/bin/maildrop: Unable to filter message. )
I suppose xfilter calls the user's shell. Is there any other way to filter
messages without this requirement?
Is using an 'smtp' content filter in the MTA (postfix) a better option?
The sollutions I've seen use 'spamassassin' instead of 'spamc', that is
the method I prefer...
Thanks in advance,
Yves
--
Re: Procmail | Maildrop ownership
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 11:24:50AM -0300, Yves Junqueira wrote:
Hi.
I am trying to set up a custom behaviour for a spam blocking mail server,
where the mail get redirected to a custom Spam folder in the user's
Maildir folder.
Everything is working fine, except that, when procmail delivers the
message, the ownership is wrongly set to root:
How is procmail invoked? What versions of what software is involved?
I use postfix 2.0.16, and /etc/postfix/main.cf contains this line:
mailbox_command = procmail -a $EXTENSION
Then procmail will run as the recipient.
I don't use global /etc/procmailrc , but .procmailrc in homedir instead.
# cat /etc/procmailrc
PATH=/bin:/usr/bin
LOGFILE=$HOME/procmaillog
DEFAULT=$HOME/Maildir/
:0fw: spamassassin.lock
* 256000
| spamc -f -u $LOGNAME
What version of spamassasin are you running?
I use 2.63, and have ommittef the -u flag, spamc runs as the same user as
parent (procmail)
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
$DEFAULT/.Spam/
EOF
# ls -la ~user/Maildir/.Spam/new/
drwx--2 user user 4096 Mar 12 09:56 .
drwx--5 user user 4096 Mar 12 09:56 ..
-rw---1 root mail 4460 Mar 12 09:37
1079095066.4158_2.ares
-rw---1 root mail 8619 Mar 12 09:56
1079096151.4216_2.ares
I suppose this ownership setting is ok for a mbox store, not for a Maildir
format, since the user isnt able to read or modify that message.
So, how can I make procmail deliver that message correctly? I could make
a script to do that, instead of using the redirection to .Spam/, but is
there a nicer way to do that?
I also had problems making an alternative maildrop sollution. The issue is
that maildrop's xfilter command wont work if the recipient user doesnt
have a valid shell:
# cat /etc/maildroprc
DEFAULT=$HOME/Maildir
# exception commented so I could see the error log
#exception {
xfilter /usr/bin/spamc -f -u $RECIPIENT
#}
if (/^X-Spam-Flag: YES/)
{
to Maildir/.Spam
}
EOF
It would work fine, except that when the recipient user does not have a
valid shell account, it exists with the following error (when I am not
using the 'exception' block):
BAF555886: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=local, delay=0, status=deferred
(temporary failure. Command output: maildrop: error writing to filter.
/usr/bin/maildrop: Unable to filter message. )
I suppose xfilter calls the user's shell. Is there any other way to filter
messages without this requirement?
Is using an 'smtp' content filter in the MTA (postfix) a better option?
The sollutions I've seen use 'spamassassin' instead of 'spamc', that is
the method I prefer...
Thanks in advance,
Yves
--
Frode Haugsgjerd
Norway
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 14:50, Stephen Gran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This one time, at band camp, Russell Coker said: Another option is to receive the entire message, accept it for delivery but instead of a 25x give a 55x code with a message saying this message was delivered, but please note that the account holder is on vacation. These methods should allow the vacation message to reliably go only to the originator of the message (or to no-one if it's a spam). However they do require that a new proxy program be written to receive the mail as no existing software (AFAIK) is capable of doing it. I think you can do something like this with /etc/aliases, although I am no expert. exim uses a real-$local_part in the standard configuration to bypass aliasing, so an entry could be added like: Neither /etc/aliases nor procmail allows a custom 55x code to be sent. A bounce (as used in your example) is undesirable in the case of spam and viruses. It makes your machine the cause of problems, which then results in other people causing problems for you. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
This one time, at band camp, Russell Coker said: Neither /etc/aliases nor procmail allows a custom 55x code to be sent. A bounce (as used in your example) is undesirable in the case of spam and viruses. It makes your machine the cause of problems, which then results in other people causing problems for you. Hmm, it seems you're right. It doesn't generate a bounce, but it does 550 - just too early (at the rcpt rather than data stage). Apparently it generated a bounce because I was using mail, which I guess calls exim as sendmail, rather than with smtp, so it behaves slightly differently. Here is a telnet session with the same configuration, coming from another machine: steve:~$ telnet mercury 25 Trying 216.158.52.98... Connected to mail.lobefin.net. Escape character is '^]'. 220 mail.lobefin.net ESMTP Exim 4.30 Sun, 11 Jan 2004 11:56:48 -0500 ehlo busybox 250-mail.lobefin.net Hello www.lobefin.net [216.158.52.108] 250-SIZE 52428800 250-PIPELINING 250-AUTH LOGIN PLAIN 250-STARTTLS 250 HELP mail from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 OK rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 550 unknown user And the corresponding log line: 2004-01-11 11:57:08 H=www.lobefin.net (busybox) [216.158.52.108] F=[EMAIL PROTECTED] rejected RCPT [EMAIL PROTECTED]: on vacation It does _not_ work as well as I had hoped, but it at least does generate a 550, rahter than a bounce. Back to the drawing board. -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
Fraser Campbell wrote:
On January 10, 2004 09:17 am, Robert Hensel wrote:
I currently have a properly working postfix-mysql setup. This all works
fine, but I would like to implement an autoresponder/other stuff. The
problem is, that for example procmail doesn't seem to work with virtual
users. I have added mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail . But this
line is completely ignored :(
Maybe someone here can help me avoid writing ugly bash scripts to do the
job ;)
The virtual delivery agent doesn't support procmail, .forward files, etc. I
believe you have no choice but to do some scripting (it can be ugly if you
insist ;-)
I'll assume that your talking about an email setup similar to the one
described at http://kirb.insanegenius.net/postfix.html ?
The only way that I can think of to do things like mail filtering, out of
office, etc. is by having a virtual map entry that forwards the email to an
alias as well as to the original user:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED],fraser-filters
In the aliases file (which could be managed in mysql still) you would have the
alias fraser-filters pipe to a command that does whatever magic you need.
This might already be what you were thinking of?
I haven't tried this but it's the easiest way that I can think of supporting
mail filtering, out of office and such. You can also write postfix filters
which might have advantages.
If you find anything please followup here as it's something I think a lot of
people might be interested in.
Being through this, I'd like to add my 0.02 EUR.
I have a handful of servers set up with postfix, mysql, amavisd-new,
spamassassin, and a home-brew administration interface in PHP.
I'm in the process of adding per-user support for:
- auto-replies (out of office, your mail has been received etc)
- auto-copy to antoher user
- auto-forward to another user (both for users on vacation)
I did the first version in PHP (as I already had a function that got me
the final recipient mailbox), triggered by postfix's always_bcc
parameter. This basically does the job, but at the cost of loosing the
for: xxx component in the Received: header, which I also need for
antoher component (the maillog scanner).
To make a long story short, the technically correct way is to do this
via content-filtering. I'm not through with this, so this is the
untested picture I have in my head for this issue. I'll post an
announcement here when I'm through this.
A configuration example (not tested; and note I also use amavisd-new):
main.cf:
# Filter mail through amavisd-new first
content_filter = smtp:[localhost]:10024
master.cf:
localhost:10025 \
inet n - - - - \
smtpd -o content_filter=vacation
localhost:10026 \
inet n - - - - \
smtpd -o content_filter=
vacation unix n - - - - pipe user=nobody \
argv=/usr/local/bin/my-vacation ${sender} ${recipient}
/usr/local/bin/my-vacation should handle all that vacation/forwarding
stuff (_and_ should honor Precedence: bulk and Precedence: list
headers properly!!!). If the mail should get to the original receiver,
it is handed over to postfix via SMTP on port 10026. For best
throughput, my-vacation should be a smtp-based client/server (like
amavisd-new is).
So the mail flow will be:
internet
|
Postfix (smtp on port 25)
|
amavisd-new (smtp port 10024)
|
Postfix (smtp port 10025)
|
my-vacation (pipe) ---+
| | |
Postfix (smtp port 10026)Postfix (smtp port 25) Postfix (smtp 25)
(to original receiver) (cc or forward) (response)
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
This one time, at band camp, Russell Coker said: Neither /etc/aliases nor procmail allows a custom 55x code to be sent. A bounce (as used in your example) is undesirable in the case of spam and viruses. It makes your machine the cause of problems, which then results in other people causing problems for you. Hmm, it seems you're right. It doesn't generate a bounce, but it does 550 - just too early (at the rcpt rather than data stage). Apparently it generated a bounce because I was using mail, which I guess calls exim as sendmail, rather than with smtp, so it behaves slightly differently. Here is a telnet session with the same configuration, coming from another machine: steve:~$ telnet mercury 25 Trying 216.158.52.98... Connected to mail.lobefin.net. Escape character is '^]'. 220 mail.lobefin.net ESMTP Exim 4.30 Sun, 11 Jan 2004 11:56:48 -0500 ehlo busybox 250-mail.lobefin.net Hello www.lobefin.net [216.158.52.108] 250-SIZE 52428800 250-PIPELINING 250-AUTH LOGIN PLAIN 250-STARTTLS 250 HELP mail from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 OK rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 550 unknown user And the corresponding log line: 2004-01-11 11:57:08 H=www.lobefin.net (busybox) [216.158.52.108] F=[EMAIL PROTECTED] rejected RCPT [EMAIL PROTECTED]: on vacation It does _not_ work as well as I had hoped, but it at least does generate a 550, rahter than a bounce. Back to the drawing board. -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - pgptMZ4XZXKGY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 14:50, Stephen Gran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This one time, at band camp, Russell Coker said: Another option is to receive the entire message, accept it for delivery but instead of a 25x give a 55x code with a message saying this message was delivered, but please note that the account holder is on vacation. These methods should allow the vacation message to reliably go only to the originator of the message (or to no-one if it's a spam). However they do require that a new proxy program be written to receive the mail as no existing software (AFAIK) is capable of doing it. I think you can do something like this with /etc/aliases, although I am no expert. exim uses a real-$local_part in the standard configuration to bypass aliasing, so an entry could be added like: Neither /etc/aliases nor procmail allows a custom 55x code to be sent. A bounce (as used in your example) is undesirable in the case of spam and viruses. It makes your machine the cause of problems, which then results in other people causing problems for you. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Postfix-mysql-procmail
Hello, I currently have a properly working postfix-mysql setup. This all works fine, but I would like to implement an autoresponder/other stuff. The problem is, that for example procmail doesn't seem to work with virtual users. I have added mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail . But this line is completely ignored :( Maybe someone here can help me avoid writing ugly bash scripts to do the job ;) Thanks in advance, Robert -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 03:17:16PM +0100, Robert Hensel wrote: Hello, I currently have a properly working postfix-mysql setup. This all works fine, but I would like to implement an autoresponder/other stuff. The problem is, that for example procmail doesn't seem to work with virtual users. I have added mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail . But this line is completely ignored :( Maybe someone here can help me avoid writing ugly bash scripts to do the job ;) Thanks in advance, Robert I have no experience with virtual users in mysql, but when switching from exim, i found that postfix consults .forward before .procmailrc And I'm not sure if procmail supports this setup. -- Frode Haugsgjerd Norway -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
On January 10, 2004 09:17 am, Robert Hensel wrote: I currently have a properly working postfix-mysql setup. This all works fine, but I would like to implement an autoresponder/other stuff. The problem is, that for example procmail doesn't seem to work with virtual users. I have added mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail . But this line is completely ignored :( Maybe someone here can help me avoid writing ugly bash scripts to do the job ;) The virtual delivery agent doesn't support procmail, .forward files, etc. I believe you have no choice but to do some scripting (it can be ugly if you insist ;-) I'll assume that your talking about an email setup similar to the one described at http://kirb.insanegenius.net/postfix.html ? The only way that I can think of to do things like mail filtering, out of office, etc. is by having a virtual map entry that forwards the email to an alias as well as to the original user: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED],fraser-filters In the aliases file (which could be managed in mysql still) you would have the alias fraser-filters pipe to a command that does whatever magic you need. This might already be what you were thinking of? I haven't tried this but it's the easiest way that I can think of supporting mail filtering, out of office and such. You can also write postfix filters which might have advantages. If you find anything please followup here as it's something I think a lot of people might be interested in. -- Fraser Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wehave.net/ Georgetown, Ontario, Canada Debian GNU/Linux -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 01:17, Robert Hensel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I currently have a properly working postfix-mysql setup. This all works fine, but I would like to implement an autoresponder/other stuff. The problem is, that for example procmail doesn't seem to work with virtual users. I have added mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail . But this line is completely ignored :( The most important thing about auto-responders is that they implement the regex described in procmailrc(5) as FROM_DAEMON. If you do this by scripts then make sure that the script does such a regular expression check. Otherwise you will inevitably end up with people forgetting to unsubscribe from mailing lists and sending vacation messages to every person who posts to the list (thus getting you lots of flames). Also think very carefully about whether you want an auto-responder, it will respond to spam and send messages to innocent third parties. Such a program can easily get you hundreds of flames per hour... I've been thinking about alternate solutions to this problem. One option is to send a 45x code in response to the message (determined by combination of mail from: and rcpt to:) for a period of 4 hours with a message about why the mail is being diverted etc, then accepting it after that. 4 hours is enough time for most mail servers to generate a warning email based on the 45x code. Another option is to receive the entire message, accept it for delivery but instead of a 25x give a 55x code with a message saying this message was delivered, but please note that the account holder is on vacation. These methods should allow the vacation message to reliably go only to the originator of the message (or to no-one if it's a spam). However they do require that a new proxy program be written to receive the mail as no existing software (AFAIK) is capable of doing it. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
This one time, at band camp, Russell Coker said: Another option is to receive the entire message, accept it for delivery but instead of a 25x give a 55x code with a message saying this message was delivered, but please note that the account holder is on vacation. These methods should allow the vacation message to reliably go only to the originator of the message (or to no-one if it's a spam). However they do require that a new proxy program be written to receive the mail as no existing software (AFAIK) is capable of doing it. I think you can do something like this with /etc/aliases, although I am no expert. exim uses a real-$local_part in the standard configuration to bypass aliasing, so an entry could be added like: testuser: real-testuser, :fail: On vacation Just tested and this is what I see: 2004-01-10 22:44:23 1AfWWV-dZ-Mc = [EMAIL PROTECTED] U=steve P=local S=313 I send the message with mail 2004-01-10 22:44:23 1AfWWV-dZ-Mc ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] R=system_aliases: It generates an error 2004-01-10 22:44:23 1AfWWV-dZ-Mc = testuser [EMAIL PROTECTED] R=real_local T=maildir_home And then gets really deliverd to testuse 2004-01-10 22:44:23 1AfWWV-dc-Rh = R=1AfWWV-dZ-Mc U=Debian-exim P=local S=1102 2004-01-10 22:44:23 1AfWWV-dZ-Mc Completed 2004-01-10 22:44:24 1AfWWV-dc-Rh = steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] R=procmail T=procmail_pipe 2004-01-10 22:44:24 1AfWWV-dc-Rh Completed And the bounce goes to me with the text noted. I don't know what your MTA allows, but this works here. HTH, -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Postfix-mysql-procmail
Hello, I currently have a properly working postfix-mysql setup. This all works fine, but I would like to implement an autoresponder/other stuff. The problem is, that for example procmail doesn't seem to work with virtual users. I have added mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail . But this line is completely ignored :( Maybe someone here can help me avoid writing ugly bash scripts to do the job ;) Thanks in advance, Robert
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 03:17:16PM +0100, Robert Hensel wrote: Hello, I currently have a properly working postfix-mysql setup. This all works fine, but I would like to implement an autoresponder/other stuff. The problem is, that for example procmail doesn't seem to work with virtual users. I have added mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail . But this line is completely ignored :( Maybe someone here can help me avoid writing ugly bash scripts to do the job ;) Thanks in advance, Robert I have no experience with virtual users in mysql, but when switching from exim, i found that postfix consults .forward before .procmailrc And I'm not sure if procmail supports this setup. -- Frode Haugsgjerd Norway
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
On January 10, 2004 09:17 am, Robert Hensel wrote: I currently have a properly working postfix-mysql setup. This all works fine, but I would like to implement an autoresponder/other stuff. The problem is, that for example procmail doesn't seem to work with virtual users. I have added mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail . But this line is completely ignored :( Maybe someone here can help me avoid writing ugly bash scripts to do the job ;) The virtual delivery agent doesn't support procmail, .forward files, etc. I believe you have no choice but to do some scripting (it can be ugly if you insist ;-) I'll assume that your talking about an email setup similar to the one described at http://kirb.insanegenius.net/postfix.html ? The only way that I can think of to do things like mail filtering, out of office, etc. is by having a virtual map entry that forwards the email to an alias as well as to the original user: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED],fraser-filters In the aliases file (which could be managed in mysql still) you would have the alias fraser-filters pipe to a command that does whatever magic you need. This might already be what you were thinking of? I haven't tried this but it's the easiest way that I can think of supporting mail filtering, out of office and such. You can also write postfix filters which might have advantages. If you find anything please followup here as it's something I think a lot of people might be interested in. -- Fraser Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wehave.net/ Georgetown, Ontario, Canada Debian GNU/Linux
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 01:17, Robert Hensel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I currently have a properly working postfix-mysql setup. This all works fine, but I would like to implement an autoresponder/other stuff. The problem is, that for example procmail doesn't seem to work with virtual users. I have added mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail . But this line is completely ignored :( The most important thing about auto-responders is that they implement the regex described in procmailrc(5) as FROM_DAEMON. If you do this by scripts then make sure that the script does such a regular expression check. Otherwise you will inevitably end up with people forgetting to unsubscribe from mailing lists and sending vacation messages to every person who posts to the list (thus getting you lots of flames). Also think very carefully about whether you want an auto-responder, it will respond to spam and send messages to innocent third parties. Such a program can easily get you hundreds of flames per hour... I've been thinking about alternate solutions to this problem. One option is to send a 45x code in response to the message (determined by combination of mail from: and rcpt to:) for a period of 4 hours with a message about why the mail is being diverted etc, then accepting it after that. 4 hours is enough time for most mail servers to generate a warning email based on the 45x code. Another option is to receive the entire message, accept it for delivery but instead of a 25x give a 55x code with a message saying this message was delivered, but please note that the account holder is on vacation. These methods should allow the vacation message to reliably go only to the originator of the message (or to no-one if it's a spam). However they do require that a new proxy program be written to receive the mail as no existing software (AFAIK) is capable of doing it. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: Postfix-mysql-procmail
This one time, at band camp, Russell Coker said: Another option is to receive the entire message, accept it for delivery but instead of a 25x give a 55x code with a message saying this message was delivered, but please note that the account holder is on vacation. These methods should allow the vacation message to reliably go only to the originator of the message (or to no-one if it's a spam). However they do require that a new proxy program be written to receive the mail as no existing software (AFAIK) is capable of doing it. I think you can do something like this with /etc/aliases, although I am no expert. exim uses a real-$local_part in the standard configuration to bypass aliasing, so an entry could be added like: testuser: real-testuser, :fail: On vacation Just tested and this is what I see: 2004-01-10 22:44:23 1AfWWV-dZ-Mc = [EMAIL PROTECTED] U=steve P=local S=313 I send the message with mail 2004-01-10 22:44:23 1AfWWV-dZ-Mc ** [EMAIL PROTECTED] R=system_aliases: It generates an error 2004-01-10 22:44:23 1AfWWV-dZ-Mc = testuser [EMAIL PROTECTED] R=real_local T=maildir_home And then gets really deliverd to testuse 2004-01-10 22:44:23 1AfWWV-dc-Rh = R=1AfWWV-dZ-Mc U=Debian-exim P=local S=1102 2004-01-10 22:44:23 1AfWWV-dZ-Mc Completed 2004-01-10 22:44:24 1AfWWV-dc-Rh = steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] R=procmail T=procmail_pipe 2004-01-10 22:44:24 1AfWWV-dc-Rh Completed And the bounce goes to me with the text noted. I don't know what your MTA allows, but this works here. HTH, -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - pgpOKeLhaeWsS.pgp Description: PGP signature
Postfix + Quota (+ procmail?)
Hello, I've been researching what would be our best option for converting our old Redhat mailserver with Sendmail to something better. I'm not exactly a Linux guru, though I'm no newbie either. Finally, I've decided to use Debian Woody, with the following setup: /dev/hda1 - /boot /dev/hda2 - / /dev/hda3 - /home - Postfix delivering to Maildir (from stable) - Courier POP3(S) / IMAP(S) (from stable) - Spamassassin (from unstable) - Amavisd / Clamav-daemon (from unstable) A user's Maildir is ~/Maildir and I've setup quota on /home (soft: 5MB, hard: 10MB). I've written the scripts to convert the old mboxes to the new Maildir format etc. Everything seems to work fine, except for this little problem I found today. When a user is over his soft quotum and I try to send a mail with an attachment which will bring the user over his hard quotum on /home, Postfix accepts the email. Then, a part of the email is written to the user's Maildir until the hard quotum is reached, and things stop. So, now I'm left with a user who has a partial email/attachment and no more disk space. Additionally, the mail is stored/kept in the user's mbox (/var/mail/user, where there is no quotum). When the user cleans up his account, the mail never gets delivered properly, and the sender gets no notification that something went wrong. The daily warnquota email is received as a 0-byte email by the user, because the hard limit is reached. I don't know what could be causing this (postfix or procmail?). Another thing I don't understand, is that whenever I send an email to a user who is below his soft limit, and which will bring the user over his hard limit at once, Ximian Evolution nicely reports to me that the sending failed, because the storage limit is exceeded. In that case, nothing gets delivered, which probably is what I want. So I'm wondering: what could be wrong with my setup? I get the idea that i should maybe get out the procmail part of the configuration. But I could only get Spamassassin to work via procmail.. I believe it should be possble to get it to work via Amavis, but I don't know how.. I'll include some of my config files. If more information is required, just let me know.. Any help would be greatly appreciated! ** /etc/postfix/main.cf ** command_directory = /usr/sbin daemon_directory = /usr/lib/postfix program_directory = /usr/lib/postfix smtpd_banner = $myhostname ESMTP setgid_group = postdrop biff = no append_dot_mydomain = no myhostname = mail2.hbh-it.net alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases myorigin = /etc/mailname mydestination = mail.hbh-it.net, localhost.hbh-it.net, , localhost relayhost = mynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8 hash:/var/lib/pop-before-smtp/hosts mailbox_command = procmail -a $EXTENSION mailbox_size_limit = 0 recipient_delimiter = + home_mailbox = Maildir/ virtual_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/virtual smtpd_tls_key_file = /etc/postfix/mail-postfix.key smtpd_tls_cert_file = /etc/postfix/mail-postfix.crt smtpd_use_tls = yes smtpd_helo_required = yes disable_vrfy_command = yes maps_rbl_domains = relays.ordb.org, opm.blitzed.org, list.dsbl.org, sbl.spamhaus.org, blackholes.easynet.nl, cbl.abuseat.org smtpd_recipient_restrictions = reject_invalid_hostname, reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_non_fqdn_recipient, reject_unknown_sender_domain, reject_unknown_recipient_domain, reject_unauth_pipelining, permit_sasl_authenticated, permit_mynetworks, reject_unauth_destination, reject_maps_rbl, permit content_filter = smtp-amavis:[127.0.0.1]:10024 ** /etc/postfix/master.cf ** # i've added the following 2 lines: smtp-amavis unix - - n - 2 smtp -o smtp_data_done_timeout=1200 -o disable_dns_lookups=yes 127.0.0.1:10025 inet n - n - - smtpd -o content_filter= -o local_recipient_maps= -o relay_recipient_maps= -o smtpd_restriction_classes= -o smtpd_client_restrictions= -o smtpd_helo_restrictions= -o smtpd_sender_restrictions= -o smtpd_recipient_restrictions=permit_mynetworks,reject -o mynetworks=127.0.0.0/8 -o strict_rfc821_envelopes=yes ** /etc/procmailrc ** DROPPRIVS=yes SHELL=/bin/bash MAILDIR=$HOME/Maildir DEFAULT=$MAILDIR/new :0fw * 5 | /usr/bin/spamc -- R.M. Evers [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postfix + Quota (+ procmail?)
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 10:47:07AM +0200, R.M. Evers wrote: Hello, I've been researching what would be our best option for converting our old Redhat mailserver with Sendmail to something better. I'm not exactly a Linux guru, though I'm no newbie either. Finally, I've decided to use Debian Woody, with the following setup: /dev/hda1 - /boot /dev/hda2 - / /dev/hda3 - /home - Postfix delivering to Maildir (from stable) - Courier POP3(S) / IMAP(S) (from stable) - Spamassassin (from unstable) - Amavisd / Clamav-daemon (from unstable) A user's Maildir is ~/Maildir and I've setup quota on /home (soft: 5MB, hard: 10MB). I've written the scripts to convert the old mboxes to the new Maildir format etc. Everything seems to work fine, except for this little problem I found today. When a user is over his soft quotum and I try to send a mail with an attachment which will bring the user over his hard quotum on /home, Postfix accepts the email. Then, a part of the email is written to the user's Maildir until the hard quotum is reached, and things stop. So, now I'm left with a user who has a partial email/attachment and no more disk space. Additionally, the mail is stored/kept in the user's mbox (/var/mail/user, where there is no quotum). When the user cleans up his account, the mail never gets delivered properly, and the sender gets no notification that something went wrong. The daily warnquota email is received as a 0-byte email by the user, because the hard limit is reached. I don't know what could be causing this (postfix or procmail?). Another thing I don't understand, is that whenever I send an email to a user who is below his soft limit, and which will bring the user over his hard limit at once, Ximian Evolution nicely reports to me that the sending failed, because the storage limit is exceeded. In that case, nothing gets delivered, which probably is what I want. So I'm wondering: what could be wrong with my setup? I get the idea that i should maybe get out the procmail part of the configuration. But I could only get Spamassassin to work via procmail.. I believe it should be possble to get it to work via Amavis, but I don't know how.. Maybe replace procmail with maildrop and use soft maildir quotas (I got this working on a server). Alternatively you can use the virtual delivery to use soft maildir quotas, but I don't known how to enable spamassassin in this case (maybe a global postfix filter). http://www.inter7.com/courierimap/README.maildirquota.html http://www.flounder.net/~mrsam/maildrop/ http://www.oav.net/vda/ -- Emmanuel Lacour Easter-eggs 44-46 rue de l'Ouest - 75014 Paris - France - Métro Gaité Phone: +33 (0) 1 43 35 00 37- Fax: +33 (0) 1 41 35 00 76 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -http://www.easter-eggs.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postfix + Quota (+ procmail?)
On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 11:18, Emmanuel Lacour wrote: On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 10:47:07AM +0200, R.M. Evers wrote: Hello, I've been researching what would be our best option for converting our old Redhat mailserver with Sendmail to something better. I'm not exactly a Linux guru, though I'm no newbie either. Finally, I've decided to use Debian Woody, with the following setup: /dev/hda1 - /boot /dev/hda2 - / /dev/hda3 - /home - Postfix delivering to Maildir (from stable) - Courier POP3(S) / IMAP(S) (from stable) - Spamassassin (from unstable) - Amavisd / Clamav-daemon (from unstable) A user's Maildir is ~/Maildir and I've setup quota on /home (soft: 5MB, hard: 10MB). I've written the scripts to convert the old mboxes to the new Maildir format etc. Everything seems to work fine, except for this little problem I found today. When a user is over his soft quotum and I try to send a mail with an attachment which will bring the user over his hard quotum on /home, Postfix accepts the email. Then, a part of the email is written to the user's Maildir until the hard quotum is reached, and things stop. So, now I'm left with a user who has a partial email/attachment and no more disk space. Additionally, the mail is stored/kept in the user's mbox (/var/mail/user, where there is no quotum). When the user cleans up his account, the mail never gets delivered properly, and the sender gets no notification that something went wrong. The daily warnquota email is received as a 0-byte email by the user, because the hard limit is reached. I don't know what could be causing this (postfix or procmail?). Another thing I don't understand, is that whenever I send an email to a user who is below his soft limit, and which will bring the user over his hard limit at once, Ximian Evolution nicely reports to me that the sending failed, because the storage limit is exceeded. In that case, nothing gets delivered, which probably is what I want. So I'm wondering: what could be wrong with my setup? I get the idea that i should maybe get out the procmail part of the configuration. But I could only get Spamassassin to work via procmail.. I believe it should be possble to get it to work via Amavis, but I don't know how.. Maybe replace procmail with maildrop and use soft maildir quotas (I got this working on a server). Alternatively you can use the virtual delivery to use soft maildir quotas, but I don't known how to enable spamassassin in this case (maybe a global postfix filter). So, if I understand correctly, I *have to* enable SpamAssassin through an MDA? I thought SpamAssassin could be called by amavisd-new, which would make the MDA unnecessary, since Postfix can deliver to Maildir directly.. Regards, -- R.M. Evers [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postfix + Quota (+ procmail?)
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 02:13:17PM +0200, R.M. Evers wrote: So, if I understand correctly, I *have to* enable SpamAssassin through an MDA? I thought SpamAssassin could be called by amavisd-new, which would make the MDA unnecessary, since Postfix can deliver to Maildir directly.. you can use spamassassin as either a content filter (e.g. with amavis), or by calling it from an MDA such as procmail or maildrop. there are pros and cons to both methods. craig -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postfix + Quota (+ procmail?)
you can use spamassassin as either a content filter (e.g. with amavis), or by calling it from an MDA such as procmail or maildrop. I'm currently calling spamassassin (spamd) via procmail after piping through amavis, because I want to use SQL prefs. Do you know off hand if amavis can handle the SQL prefs, or do I need to keep things as they are? Thanks in advance, -- Chris Hilts [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Postfix + Quota (+ procmail?)
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 08:05:31PM -0500, Chris Hilts wrote: you can use spamassassin as either a content filter (e.g. with amavis), or by calling it from an MDA such as procmail or maildrop. I'm currently calling spamassassin (spamd) via procmail after piping through amavis, because I want to use SQL prefs. Do you know off hand if amavis can handle the SQL prefs, or do I need to keep things as they are? i think it can, but i don't use it myself (i use my own little filter script) so i'm not 100% sure. the advantage of using an MDA is that you get greater per-user customisation capability because by the time it gets to the MDA, the final recipient address is known and that can be used as a lookup key into the SQL prefs. this information isn't available earlier than that (although you can fake it by using the recipient address...which mostly works but has a few problems, e.g. with catch-all addresses or aliases, each one would need it's own custom config even though they end up in the same mailbox. this may be a feature or it may be a bug depending on what you want :-) OTOH, using spamassassin from an MDA only works for mail delivered to the local system. it does not work for in-transit mail (e.g. relayed, uucp, etc). if you need that, use SA as a content filter. like i said, there are pros and cons to both. craig -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Procmail weirdness
Hello *,
I'm having some procmail weirdness that I can't get my brain around.
I have a box running exim with two domains that sort to various system users.
Every user has a procmailrc file in their home directory like this:
LINEBUF=4096
MAILDIR=$HOME/Maildir/
:0 c
*
$HOME/MailBU/Inbound/
:0
$MAILDIR
This works perfectly for the primary domain but not the virtual domain. For
the broken domain, if I put this procmailrc file in a user's home directory
their mail gets delivered in mbox format to /var/spool/mail/{username}. If I
remove it it gets
delivered in maildir format to /home/{username}/Maildir/new as it should.
Any suggestions as to where to look for the problem?
Pete
--
http://www.elbnet.com
ELB Internet Service, Inc.
Web Design, Computer Consulting, Internet Hosting
cyrus-imap + postfix + procmail = trouble
Gregory Wood Farsight Voice Data Solutions 1219 West University Blvd. Odessa TX 79764-7119 915-335-0879
Re: cyrus-imap + postfix + procmail = trouble
Hi! The configuration and testing went pretty well for a time. So far, I'm only testing in-house accounts. I created two users, connect to squirrelmail, create an email for the other user and send it. Squirrelmail/imap show it in the send folder. When I log in as the other user, no email. I checked mail.log and mail.info and it appears the mail went through postfix. ProcMail is complaining that it doesn't have the right security to write to the log file. Any ideas? Have you configured procmail to deliver to Maildir style folders? $ cat /etc/procmailrc SHELL=/bin/sh # Maildir format MAILDIR=$HOME/Maildir/ DEFAULT=$MAILDIR LOGFILE=$HOME/.procmail.log # and in /etc/postfix/main.cf mailbox_command = procmail -a $EXTENSION Regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cyrus-imap + postfix + procmail = trouble
Upps! The answer is for courier-imap, not cyrus... sorry :-( Any ideas? Have you configured procmail to deliver to Maildir style folders? $ cat /etc/procmailrc SHELL=/bin/sh # Maildir format MAILDIR=$HOME/Maildir/ DEFAULT=$MAILDIR LOGFILE=$HOME/.procmail.log # and in /etc/postfix/main.cf mailbox_command = procmail -a $EXTENSION Regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cyrus-imap + postfix + procmail = trouble
There are many very good howto on using the Cyrus, Postfix setup. However, you seem to know Exim why go to Postfix ? You can find the how-to link from the http://www.postfix.org. I've used exim at my site and several others without problem. I decided to build a new server and add imap and squirrelmail. If you like Exim, maybe Exim with the maildir format and Courier IMAP would take less time for you. I use Postfix, but Exim is also good, if you understand it better. I setup Exim for a friend who wanted to use IMAP. You only need to chage one or two lines in the Exim Config file. Since I know Courier and Squirrelmail, I installed them. It is very simple to setup Courier IMAP with Exim if you use it with a local /etc/passwd and local /etc/shadow file. Of course, this type of setup can be a little dangerous if you don't follow the Debian Security howto. http://www.linuxsecurity.com/resource_files/host_security/securing-debian-howto/index.en.html If you do choose to do this make sure the clients are forced to use encryption, otherwise you will have unwelcomed guests. My friend did not follow the Debian howto, so you can only guess what happened. ;-) Ted -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
User Unknowns .. If user is a number with Sendmail + Procmail
I have a major problem I'm trying to debug.. I have couple users that have username of just numbers.. 8400 is one case. You can finger 8400 it's there You can grep for 8400 in password file and shadow file and user is there /home/8400 is there Before switching from Slackware to Debian user could get mail now his mail is bounced out user unknown. Anyone have any ideas what to look at? Thanks! --- Sonny
Re: User Unknowns .. If user is a number with Sendmail + Procmail
On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Sonny Kupka wrote: Before switching from Slackware to Debian user could get mail now his mail is bounced out user unknown. What do your mail logs actually say? Jeremy C. Reed http://www.isp-faq.com/
Re: User Unknowns .. If user is a number with Sendmail + Procmail
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 01:28:07PM -0500, Sonny Kupka wrote: I have a major problem I'm trying to debug.. I have couple users that have username of just numbers.. 8400 is one case. You can finger 8400 it's there You can grep for 8400 in password file and shadow file and user is there /home/8400 is there you are asking for trouble if you have numeric usernames. there's an inherent ambiguity when you specify user 8400, say to a tool like chmod, whether you are referring to the login name 8400, or the UID 8400. Before switching from Slackware to Debian user could get mail now his mail is bounced out user unknown. debian's sendmail is probably a newer version and/or compiled with different compile-time options. Anyone have any ideas what to look at? i suggest that the all-numeric login names are changed (perhaps, e.g., from 8400 to u8400) and then have aliases in /etc/aliases like so: 8400: u8400 that way they still get to use the same email address, the only thing that changes is their login name. also, if they have ~/public_html directories, you need to put in a redirect rule in apache to redirect requests for their old ~ to their new one. e.g. RedirectMatch 301 /~8400($|/.*) http://your.domain.here/~u8400$1 in other words, change their login to something reasonable and redirect all requests (mail and web and whatever else) for the old login to the new. sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and fix things that are broken. when i started at my current job a few years ago, i noticed that some user accounts on one of our solaris boxes had been created with completely invalid account names (e.g. starting with or containing characters like # or $). they kind of worked, but they caused problems. we had to rename them. craig -- craig sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch
Re: 50MB mbox size limit with postfix/procmail
You may also want to take a look at: mailbox_limit = 0 virtual_mailbox_limit = 0 mailbox_size_limit = 0 -- .''`. Life is WYGIWYD: What You Get Is What You Deserve : :' : `. `' Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (2.4.18 + Ext3) `-www.amayita.com www.malapecora.com www.chicasduras.com
Re: Procmail losing messages
Hello! On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 01:05:03PM -0400, Gene Grimm wrote: For some reason, procmail seems to be sporadically losing messages into thin air. Only a few messages are being lost, but they are important messages (as ... Not that this has necessarily to do with it, but safecat's author claims, that procmail's (relatively recent) Maildir delivery feature is not really save. Be sure that mailbox locking does not fail also. Best Regards, Jorge-León
Procmail losing messages
For some reason, procmail seems to be sporadically losing messages into thin air. Only a few messages are being lost, but they are important messages (as opposed to spam). I can see the specific message subjects and sender addresses in the procmail.log file, but not in the mailbox file. The mailbox file contains messages from several days before and after the missing message date. I am preparing to implement both Amavis-Postfix/ClamAV and SpamAssassin scanning on this mail server, so procmail will be required. Was there an issue with the previous version of procmail that might have caused this? I just upgraded that server today to Woody. As of right now, there is no /etc/procmailrc file and the .procmailrc file is simply: LOGFILE=$HOME/procmail.log
50MB mbox size limit with postfix/procmail
I'm using postfix with procmail for local delivery. Latest versions from woody: ii postfix 1.1.11-0.woody2 ii procmail 3.22-4 When any mbox reaches 50MB, procmail and/or postfix will refuse to deliver it to that mbox, and the mail is instead delivered to the next matching procmail rule (usually the catch-all rule at the end of my .procmailrc file) I have tried really hard to find this limit, even by grepping the sources for both postfix and procmail. I tried setting virtual_mailbox_limit = 0 in the postfix main.cf, but no luck. And yes, I know that the limit most probably lies in procmail(logically that is) However, I cannot find any such setting in the procmail docs. What did I overlook? Thanx, Øystein
Re: 50MB mbox size limit with postfix/procmail
mailbox_size_limit = On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Oystein Nerhus wrote: I'm using postfix with procmail for local delivery. Latest versions from woody: ii postfix 1.1.11-0.woody2 ii procmail 3.22-4 When any mbox reaches 50MB, procmail and/or postfix will refuse to deliver it to that mbox, and the mail is instead delivered to the next matching procmail rule (usually the catch-all rule at the end of my .procmailrc file) I have tried really hard to find this limit, even by grepping the sources for both postfix and procmail. I tried setting virtual_mailbox_limit = 0 in the postfix main.cf, but no luck. And yes, I know that the limit most probably lies in procmail(logically that is) However, I cannot find any such setting in the procmail docs. What did I overlook? Thanx, Øystein -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 50MB mbox size limit with postfix/procmail
Thank you :) That did the trick. Øystein On Sat, Aug 17, 2002 at 03:53:48PM +0200, Andrius Kasparavicius wrote: mailbox_size_limit = On Sat, 17 Aug 2002, Oystein Nerhus wrote: I'm using postfix with procmail for local delivery. Latest versions from woody: ii postfix 1.1.11-0.woody2 ii procmail 3.22-4 When any mbox reaches 50MB, procmail and/or postfix will refuse to deliver it to that mbox, and the mail is instead delivered to the next matching procmail rule (usually the catch-all rule at the end of my .procmailrc file)
Re: Postfix/Procmail losing mail
Gene Grimm escribio: Some of our clients are reporting that they are getting virtually no mail. Even when specific people tell them they have sent mail, these clients receive nothing through the POP3 server (so it's apparently not getting to their inbox). Postfix is configured to use procmail as the delivery agent. According to the log files, postfix is sending all of it to procmail, but it doesn't appear to be reaching the mailbox. There is no $HOME/.procmailrc or /etc/procmailrc file on this server. Thus far I cannot find anything that tells me procmail is dropping messages. Can anyone point me to where I can find debug info on procmail? IMHO if you don't use procmail, remove it from the postfix configuration. If you want to test it, you can use the .forward file to see what is going on. A quick search on google gave me this: http://www.itworld.com/nl/unix_sys_adm/03132002/ -- Regards, Germán
Re: procmail to deliver in a Maildir/ for every user?
On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 10:12:18AM +1100, Jeremy Lunn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 18 lines which said: Change your /etc/procmailrc to this and it'll fix your problem: DEFAULT=$HOME/Maildir/ It works fine, thanks, that's what I was looking for. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: procmail to deliver in a Maildir/ for every user?
On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 10:12:18AM +1100, Jeremy Lunn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 18 lines which said: Change your /etc/procmailrc to this and it'll fix your problem: DEFAULT=$HOME/Maildir/ It works fine, thanks, that's what I was looking for.
procmail to deliver in a Maildir/ for every user?
Hello, I wish to use procmail as the system-wide delivery agent (the MTA is Postfix) *and* to have mail delivered in qmail-style Maildir/ by default (the POP and IMAP daemons are Courier, which only handles Maildirs). If I write a /etc/procmailrc: :0 $HOME/Maildir/ it works but it even does so for the few shell users which have a ~/.procmailrc (the home procmailrc is read after, when the mail has already been delivered). The procmailrc syntax does not allow me to test the existence of a ~/.procmailrc. Is there a way to combine my wishes? Otherwise, I'll use Postfix internal MDA (which will make it inconvenient to have system-wide services such as mail duplicata removal) and the shell users will have to invoke procmail from a ~/.forward. Possible solution, untested: write a local MDA which is a very simple shell script. It will test the existence of ~/.procmailrc and will invoke procmail with different arguments. Ugly, I think. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: procmail to deliver in a Maildir/ for every user?
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 05:28:36PM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: If I write a /etc/procmailrc: :0 $HOME/Maildir/ it works but it even does so for the few shell users which have a ~/.procmailrc (the home procmailrc is read after, when the mail has already been delivered). The procmailrc syntax does not allow me to test the existence of a ~/.procmailrc. Change your /etc/procmailrc to this and it'll fix your problem: DEFAULT=$HOME/Maildir/ -- Jeremy Lunn Melbourne, Australia http://www.jabber.org/ - the next generation of Instant Messaging. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: procmail
On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 09:46:33AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: PS: there's no such thing as a BCC header in incoming mail. it is stripped either by the user-agent when sending a message or, at the latest, by the MTA when it receives the message. it can't be used to sort mail because it doesn't exist. That's wrong according the the specs[1], although I've never seen an SMTP MUA/MTA that did actually show the Bcc receipients to each other. bye, -christian- [1] rfc822 4.5.3. BCC / RESENT-BCC Some systems may choose to include the text of the Bcc field only in the author(s)'s copy, while others may also include it in the text sent to all those indicated in the Bcc list. -- This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. If this had been an actual emergency, do you really think we'd stick around to tell you? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: procmail
On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 09:46:33AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: PS: there's no such thing as a BCC header in incoming mail. it is stripped either by the user-agent when sending a message or, at the latest, by the MTA when it receives the message. it can't be used to sort mail because it doesn't exist. That's wrong according the the specs[1], although I've never seen an SMTP MUA/MTA that did actually show the Bcc receipients to each other. bye, -christian- [1] rfc822 4.5.3. BCC / RESENT-BCC Some systems may choose to include the text of the Bcc field only in the author(s)'s copy, while others may also include it in the text sent to all those indicated in the Bcc list. -- This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. If this had been an actual emergency, do you really think we'd stick around to tell you?
Re: procmail
On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 07:52:41PM +0100, Christian Hammers wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 09:46:33AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: PS: there's no such thing as a BCC header in incoming mail. it is stripped either by the user-agent when sending a message or, at the latest, by the MTA when it receives the message. it can't be used to sort mail because it doesn't exist. That's wrong according the the specs[1], although I've never seen an SMTP MUA/MTA that did actually show the Bcc receipients to each other. possibly true in theorybut not in practice. [1] rfc822 4.5.3. BCC / RESENT-BCC Some systems may choose to include the text of the Bcc field only in the author(s)'s copy, that would be up to the MUA if/when it saves a copy of the sent message. while others may also include it in the text sent to all those indicated in the Bcc list. and that's so obviously broken that i doubt if anyone has ever implemented it - even for an MS mail program. craig -- craig sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch
Re: procmail
On Sat, Dec 15, 2001 at 12:16:27PM +0100, KOZMAN Balint wrote: I use procmail to sort incoming mails downloaded via fetchmail among my internal users. The procmail rules refer to the To, cc, bcc headers, but if someone subscribes to a mailing list, his/her address won't be among these. Any ideas? you've just discovered why POP is completely inadequate as a mail transport protocol - it loses the envelope recipient information. POP was never designed to do the job you're trying to make it do. it was designed to be a protocol that allowed remote access by a user to their personal mailbox. it does that job reasonably well. it was not designed to transport the mail for an entire domain...at best, it can be kludged to do a bad imitation of that particular job (see choice 1 below). the same goes for IMAP. your two choices are: 1. convince your ISP to hack their MTA to add the envelope-recipient info (e.g. in an X-Envelope-Recipient header or by somehow munging the To: or Delivered-To: or whatever header) when delivering mail to a local mailbox...and do that without compromising privacy (i.e. BCC means Blind Carbon Copy - other recipients are not supposed to see who it was delivered to) 2. use a protocol designed for the job you're trying to do. uucp is ideal. btw, it's not at all uncommon to get clueless NT consultants telling you that POP works well for this. that's because they're clueless and have no idea how mail works. i had an MS Exchange consultant whining at me last week, demanding to pick up his client's mail by using finger which is, according to him, the industry standard for mail. i still don't know for sure what he was crapping on about - my guess is he had one ISP set up some ugly kludge where finger would trigger a delivery via smtp (which is a pretty stupid and insecure idea). i told him his choices were to either use uucp or to put up with the limitations of POP. of course, that scary word uucp terrified him, even though it's actually pretty easy to set up and there are free uucp programs that work as an add-on to Exchange (e.g. UUPC/Extended). speaking of uucp, does anyone have any recommendations for uucp programs that work with Exchange? i've never used either, but have been referring people to either UUPC/Extended[1] (free) or mailcoach[2] (commercial). [1] http://web.kew.com:8080/kendra/uupc/ [2] http://www.mailcoach.com/ craig PS: there's no such thing as a BCC header in incoming mail. it is stripped either by the user-agent when sending a message or, at the latest, by the MTA when it receives the message. it can't be used to sort mail because it doesn't exist. -- craig sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: procmail
Hi all I've been down the single mailbox/fetchmail path many times. If you do this expect regular support calls from irate customers whose email never made it to them. The only real solution (except running your own mail server) is a separate mail box for all. I have found that many ISPs will now do this for free as apart from the setup there are no extra resources used. And any good ISP has automated 'unique' mail box set up online, so you create and configure your own. Look for 'Unlimited pop accounts' in your ISP. This should not cost any more. By no extra resources I mean that the mail server still has to process the same amount of mail. And apply the same rules. Kind regards Glenn Hocking Craig Sanders wrote: On Sat, Dec 15, 2001 at 12:16:27PM +0100, KOZMAN Balint wrote: I use procmail to sort incoming mails downloaded via fetchmail among my internal users. The procmail rules refer to the To, cc, bcc headers, but if someone subscribes to a mailing list, his/her address won't be among these. Any ideas? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: procmail
On Sat, Dec 15, 2001 at 12:16:27PM +0100, KOZMAN Balint wrote: I use procmail to sort incoming mails downloaded via fetchmail among my internal users. The procmail rules refer to the To, cc, bcc headers, but if someone subscribes to a mailing list, his/her address won't be among these. Any ideas? you've just discovered why POP is completely inadequate as a mail transport protocol - it loses the envelope recipient information. POP was never designed to do the job you're trying to make it do. it was designed to be a protocol that allowed remote access by a user to their personal mailbox. it does that job reasonably well. it was not designed to transport the mail for an entire domain...at best, it can be kludged to do a bad imitation of that particular job (see choice 1 below). the same goes for IMAP. your two choices are: 1. convince your ISP to hack their MTA to add the envelope-recipient info (e.g. in an X-Envelope-Recipient header or by somehow munging the To: or Delivered-To: or whatever header) when delivering mail to a local mailbox...and do that without compromising privacy (i.e. BCC means Blind Carbon Copy - other recipients are not supposed to see who it was delivered to) 2. use a protocol designed for the job you're trying to do. uucp is ideal. btw, it's not at all uncommon to get clueless NT consultants telling you that POP works well for this. that's because they're clueless and have no idea how mail works. i had an MS Exchange consultant whining at me last week, demanding to pick up his client's mail by using finger which is, according to him, the industry standard for mail. i still don't know for sure what he was crapping on about - my guess is he had one ISP set up some ugly kludge where finger would trigger a delivery via smtp (which is a pretty stupid and insecure idea). i told him his choices were to either use uucp or to put up with the limitations of POP. of course, that scary word uucp terrified him, even though it's actually pretty easy to set up and there are free uucp programs that work as an add-on to Exchange (e.g. UUPC/Extended). speaking of uucp, does anyone have any recommendations for uucp programs that work with Exchange? i've never used either, but have been referring people to either UUPC/Extended[1] (free) or mailcoach[2] (commercial). [1] http://web.kew.com:8080/kendra/uupc/ [2] http://www.mailcoach.com/ craig PS: there's no such thing as a BCC header in incoming mail. it is stripped either by the user-agent when sending a message or, at the latest, by the MTA when it receives the message. it can't be used to sort mail because it doesn't exist. -- craig sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch
Re: procmail
Hi all I've been down the single mailbox/fetchmail path many times. If you do this expect regular support calls from irate customers whose email never made it to them. The only real solution (except running your own mail server) is a separate mail box for all. I have found that many ISPs will now do this for free as apart from the setup there are no extra resources used. And any good ISP has automated 'unique' mail box set up online, so you create and configure your own. Look for 'Unlimited pop accounts' in your ISP. This should not cost any more. By no extra resources I mean that the mail server still has to process the same amount of mail. And apply the same rules. Kind regards Glenn Hocking Craig Sanders wrote: On Sat, Dec 15, 2001 at 12:16:27PM +0100, KOZMAN Balint wrote: I use procmail to sort incoming mails downloaded via fetchmail among my internal users. The procmail rules refer to the To, cc, bcc headers, but if someone subscribes to a mailing list, his/her address won't be among these. Any ideas?
procmail
Hi, Sorry if a bit offtopic, but I haven't found any solutions yet to this: I use procmail to sort incoming mails downloaded via fetchmail among my internal users. The procmail rules refer to the To, cc, bcc headers, but if someone subscribes to a mailing list, his/her address won't be among these. Any ideas? Regards, Balint -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: procmail
On Saturday, 15. December 2001 12:16, KOZMAN Balint wrote: I use procmail to sort incoming mails downloaded via fetchmail among my internal users. The procmail rules refer to the To, cc, bcc headers, but if someone subscribes to a mailing list, his/her address won't be among these. Any ideas? Some mailing lists contain your address encoded as Return-Path. For mail from this list it looks like this: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note that @ became =. Hope that helps a bit. Regards, -- Christof Glaser -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
procmail
Hi, Sorry if a bit offtopic, but I haven't found any solutions yet to this: I use procmail to sort incoming mails downloaded via fetchmail among my internal users. The procmail rules refer to the To, cc, bcc headers, but if someone subscribes to a mailing list, his/her address won't be among these. Any ideas? Regards, Balint
Re: procmail
On Saturday, 15. December 2001 12:16, KOZMAN Balint wrote: I use procmail to sort incoming mails downloaded via fetchmail among my internal users. The procmail rules refer to the To, cc, bcc headers, but if someone subscribes to a mailing list, his/her address won't be among these. Any ideas? Some mailing lists contain your address encoded as Return-Path. For mail from this list it looks like this: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note that @ became =. Hope that helps a bit. Regards, -- Christof Glaser
globally enabling procmail with exim
Hello, I would like to activate a virus scanning system that is based on procmail. I would like to do this globally for every user on my system, but from the configuration examples and docs of exim, I understand that procmail is by default called only if a ~/.procmailrc file is present. How should I modified exim's config so as to check for existance of /etc/procmailrc first and then continue as before to check for the private ones? Thanks Pf -- --- Pierfrancesco Caci | ik5pvx | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://gusp.dyndns.org Firenze - Italia | Office for the Complication of Otherwise Simple Affairs Linux penny 2.4.7 #1 Thu Jul 26 14:48:56 CEST 2001 i686 unknown -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
