Re: Markup in mail messages

[eben]

On 5/14/24 22:17, Max Nikulin wrote:

On 15/05/2024 02:32, Greg Wooledge wrote:

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 08:16:20PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:

Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it.

[...]

The only sensible interpretation I can
come up with for why these asterisks were added is that they're being
placed around text that's supposed to be emphasized/italicized.


*Bold*, /italics/, and _underlined_ markup is supported by various
mailers, e.g. Thunderbird and Gnus. Some render superscripts^1 and
subscripts_2 as well.

Backticks (`echo $PATH`) are more specific to markdown. However
sometimes I use them not expecting that the message will be rendered as
markdown. Just to avoid ambiguity where a piece of code starts and ends.


If your mail path is sufficiently modern, you might be able to use Unicode
subscripts₁ and superscripts².  But, they're kind of a pain to type for >1
character.

Re: any usbip users

[Antonio Russo]

On 2024-05-14 18:28, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote:
> i was plundering around and found a new, to me, utility
> is any one using usbip
> is it usable or cluncky
> sounds like it might be handy
> 

I use it to forward a usb device that I do not trust to a VM. I
use usbauth to protect the host, and I seem to remember having
trouble coercing libvirt to pass a usb device with untrusted
interfaces (or maybe libvirt could only forward usb interfaces?).
So I resorted to usbip, which allowed me to forward a usb device
with no trusted interfaces.

My biggest complaint is that there was no way to have usbip
communicate over a domain socket (or better still, stdin/stdout). 
Then again, it's right there in the name, so can I really complain
about that?

I found forwarding ports to be "clunky", but I'm pretty sure
a lot of other people would have found redirecting unix
pipes to be clunky to them.

To each their own, I suppose.  I otherwise found it delightfully
simple and effective.

Antonio

OpenPGP_0xB01C53D5DED4A4EE.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key


OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Markup in mail messages (was: Re: OT: Top Posting)

[Max Nikulin]

On 15/05/2024 02:32, Greg Wooledge wrote:

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 08:16:20PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:

Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it.

[...]

The only sensible interpretation I can
come up with for why these asterisks were added is that they're being
placed around text that's supposed to be emphasized/italicized.


*Bold*, /italics/, and _underlined_ markup is supported by various
mailers, e.g. Thunderbird and Gnus. Some render superscripts^1 and
subscripts_2 as well.

Backticks (`echo $PATH`) are more specific to markdown. However
sometimes I use them not expecting that the message will be rendered as
markdown. Just to avoid ambiguity where a piece of code starts and ends.

any usbip users

[fxkl47BF]

i was plundering around and found a new, to me, utility
is any one using usbip
is it usable or cluncky
sounds like it might be handy

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[jeremy ardley]

On 14/5/24 20:17, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 02:11:53PM +0200, Richard wrote:

[...]


Setting the permissions in /var/log/dovecot to 666 actually didn't
solve the problem [...]

This seems to prove (or, at least, strongly suggest) that I was barking
up the wrong tree. I've currently run out of trees and at $DAYJOB, so
tight on resources. Good luck :)


Clarifying my understanding of the issues I have discovered that postfix runs a 
non chroot service 'local' that has the initial responsibility to deliver mail 
locally.

local runs as root and has the ability to deliver mail to local files

local also has the ability to delegate the delivery to dovecot and other 
agents. This can be configured in postfix main.conf as

virtual_transport  =  lmtp:unix:private/dovecot-lmtp or mailbox_transport  =  
lmtp:unix:private/dovecot-lmtp

From the postfix howto guide

mailbox_transport_maps (default: empty)

    Optional lookup tables with per-recipient message delivery transports to 
use for local(8) mailbox delivery, whether or not the recipients are found in 
the UNIX passwd database.

    The precedence of local(8) delivery features from high to low is: aliases, 
.forward files, mailbox_transport_maps, mailbox_transport, mailbox_command_maps,
mailbox_command, home_mailbox, mail_spool_directory, 
fallback_transport_maps, fallback_transport and luser_relay.

https://www.postfix.org/local.8.html

https://doc.dovecot.org/configuration_manual/howto/postfix_dovecot_lmtp/

Re: OT: Top Posting

[Larry Martell]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 6:05 PM Jeffrey Walton  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 2:40 PM Richard  wrote:
>
>> You really must think of yourself as being the epitome of human creation.
>> I don't see any use in continuing this nonsense. If you don't have anything
>> relevant to say, this case is closed for me.
>>
>
> Who are you talking about? There are two people in the reply below.
>

Gene IS the epitome of human creation.



>
>> Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 16:55 Uhr schrieb gene heskett <
>> ghesk...@shentel.net>:
>>
>>> On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote:
>>> > Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean
>>> it's
>>> > not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's
>>> > called a setting.
>>> >
>>> No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor
>>> to put your reply after the question. It really is that simple. If your
>>> choice of email agents cannot do that, its time to switch to an agent
>>> that can. There are dozens of them.
>>>
>>> > Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:57 Uhr schrieb Loris Bennett
>>> > mailto:loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>>:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Richard,
>>> >
>>> > Richard mailto:rrosn...@gmail.com>> writes:
>>> >
>>> >  > "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being
>>> replied
>>> >  > to) is literally industry standard behavior.
>>> >
>>> > Can you provide a link to the standard you are referring to?
>>> >
>>> > Assuming such a standard exists, how would it apply to this
>>> newsgroup?
>>> >
>>> > [snip (51 lines)]
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> >
>>> > Loris
>>>
>>> Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET.
>>>
>>

Re: OT: Top Posting

[fxkl47BF]

On Tue, 14 May 2024, Andy Smith wrote:

> Hello,
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote:
>> don't y'all have any thing better to do
>
> You must be new here.

sorta
i've only been using versions of linux since the early 90's :)
downloaded it from an archie server on to 2 floppies

>
> Get used to reading with a "mark thread read" key in your MUA of
> choice, is my best advice.

i've got to admit to being weak
reading the brilliant and riveting prose is addictive
and entertainment is in short supply around here
especially after the chickens go to bed


>
> Thanks,
> Andy
>
> --
> https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
>

Re: OT: Top Posting

[Andy Smith]

Hello,

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote:
> don't y'all have any thing better to do

You must be new here.

Get used to reading with a "mark thread read" key in your MUA of
choice, is my best advice.

Thanks,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

Re: sanity check for /etc/ssl/certs?

[Jeffrey Walton]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 3:10 PM Harald Dunkel 
wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> is there a sanity check for /etc/ssl/certs included in Bookworm?
> I've got one host with some missing symlinks in this directory, eg.
>
> root@dpcl064:/etc/ssl/certs# ls -al *SSL.com*
> ls: cannot access '*SSL.com*': No such file or directory
>

It is hard to say what is going on.

I see them in Debian Unstable:

$ find /etc/ssl/certs -iname '*ssl.com*'
/etc/ssl/certs/SSL.com_TLS_RSA_Root_CA_2022.pem
/etc/ssl/certs/SSL.com_EV_Root_Certification_Authority_RSA_R2.pem
/etc/ssl/certs/SSL.com_TLS_ECC_Root_CA_2022.pem
/etc/ssl/certs/SSL.com_Root_Certification_Authority_RSA.pem
/etc/ssl/certs/SSL.com_Root_Certification_Authority_ECC.pem
/etc/ssl/certs/SSL.com_EV_Root_Certification_Authority_ECC.pem

I don't see anything in Debian's bug reporter about removing ssl.com;
confer, .
And ssl.com is included in Mozilla and Chrome's root program.


> Other hosts show
>
> root@dpcl082:/etc/ssl/certs# ls -al *SSL.com*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 82 Jul 16  2018
> SSL.com_EV_Root_Certification_Authority_ECC.pem ->
> /usr/share/ca-certificates/mozilla/SSL.com_EV_Root_Certification_Authority_ECC.crt
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 85 Jul 16  2018
> SSL.com_EV_Root_Certification_Authority_RSA_R2.pem ->
> /usr/share/ca-certificates/mozilla/SSL.com_EV_Root_Certification_Authority_RSA_R2.crt
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 79 Jul 16  2018
> SSL.com_Root_Certification_Authority_ECC.pem ->
> /usr/share/ca-certificates/mozilla/SSL.com_Root_Certification_Authority_ECC.crt
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 79 Jul 16  2018
> SSL.com_Root_Certification_Authority_RSA.pem ->
> /usr/share/ca-certificates/mozilla/SSL.com_Root_Certification_Authority_RSA.crt
>
> The files in /usr/share/ca-certificates are available, of course.
> The access rights seem OK. update-ca-certificates or reinstalling
> ca-certificates (with overwrite) didn't solve this problem.
>

Hazarding a guess... Have you upgraded that system over the years? That may
explain why you are seeing old artifacts and dead symlinks.

Maybe you should run `symlinks -r / | grep dangling` to locate dead
symlinks, and then run `symlink -r -d /` to delete them (once you are
satisfied with the resulting list).

Jeff

Re: OT: Top Posting

[debian-user]

Greg Wooledge  wrote:

> In this particular instance, we've got a person from the second
> culture who seems to have no idea that other cultures exist, or that
> a mailing list might not adhere to their own expectations.  This
> person is acting belligerantly, and will not listen to gentle
> reminders.

There's another point that this person doesn't seem to realize, which
is that he's the one asking for help, and so he should be making
efforts to adapt to the desires of those he wishes to help him, rather
than trying to insist they adapt to his ways :(

But there's a noticeably slower response to his posts now, so maybe
he'll learn by experience.

Re: OT: Top Posting

[Greg Wooledge]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 08:16:20PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it.

I can't be sure where they're coming from exactly, but every once in
a while I see messages on debian-user, bug-bash or help-bash which
have extra asterisk characters scattered throughout them (usually
make the code samples break).  The only sensible interpretation I can
come up with for why these asterisks were added is that they're being
placed around text that's supposed to be emphasized/italicized.

When reading the message with the idea that "this might be markdown
text" in mind, it's possible to guess, in most cases, which asterisks
should be removed to render the code samples or terminal session pastes
correct.

Re: OT: Top Posting

[Jeffrey Walton]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 2:40 PM Richard  wrote:

> You really must think of yourself as being the epitome of human creation.
> I don't see any use in continuing this nonsense. If you don't have anything
> relevant to say, this case is closed for me.
>

Who are you talking about? There are two people in the reply below.

Jeff


> Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 16:55 Uhr schrieb gene heskett <
> ghesk...@shentel.net>:
>
>> On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote:
>> > Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's
>> > not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's
>> > called a setting.
>> >
>> No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor
>> to put your reply after the question. It really is that simple. If your
>> choice of email agents cannot do that, its time to switch to an agent
>> that can. There are dozens of them.
>>
>> > Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:57 Uhr schrieb Loris Bennett
>> > mailto:loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>>:
>> >
>> > Hi Richard,
>> >
>> > Richard mailto:rrosn...@gmail.com>> writes:
>> >
>> >  > "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being
>> replied
>> >  > to) is literally industry standard behavior.
>> >
>> > Can you provide a link to the standard you are referring to?
>> >
>> > Assuming such a standard exists, how would it apply to this
>> newsgroup?
>> >
>> > [snip (51 lines)]
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Loris
>>
>> Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET.
>>
>

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Richard]

Says the one refusing to stay on topic. What a sad hypocrite.

On Tue, May 14, 2024, 20:10 Henning Follmann 
wrote:

> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 03:11:16PM +0200, Richard wrote:
> > "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being replied to)
> > is literally industry standard behavior.
> >
> Whatever.
> It is not standard behavior in mailing lists.
>
> https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMailingLists#Posting_Rules.2C_Guidelines.2C_and_Tips
>
> But I just asked you to not to. You can ignore that, as you do.
>
> Good luck with your issues.
>
> > Also, I don't think you've really cleared out any confusion. Now, how
> > exactly can dovecot log to /var/log/dovecot/ without (postfix) throwing
> > errors? Because it clearly is for 2 out of 3 files as visible from the
> file
> > sizes in my original post. Only the debug file is empty, but maybe
> nothing
> > relevant enough has been found yet. There are entries from master,
> > imap, imap-login, managesieve-login, anvil and various other processes in
> > info and error. But the error messages from postfix still appear, also
> > seemingly at least vastly slowing down emails being delivered to the
> users,
> > if not bringing that to a complete halt. Only after commenting out these
> > locations in 10-logging.conf the mails show up for the users.
> >
>
>
> -H
>
>
> --
> Henning Follmann   | hfollm...@itcfollmann.com
>
>

Re: OT: Top Posting

[Karen Lewellen]

well, speaking personally, I can respect both sides.
I use a screen reader.  Having to wade through loads of text, for a 
conversational  flow, especially when not edited is far from productive 
for me personally.
it is much better to have a top post, for me personally, because I have no 
issues  reading below..if needful.
I can only imagine what it is like for folks on small screens, having to 
translate from English etc.

Do I understand the conversation idea?
absolutely.
Do I also realize that if the thread is not edited the conversation is 
less fluid and more a lake of mud?


Absolutely as well.
Karen



On Tue, 14 May 2024, Nicolas George wrote:


Greg Wooledge (12024-05-14):

Usenet news.  For people in this culture, there is a well-defined set
of "netiquette" rules -- plain text messages, inline quoting with "> "
citation characters, lines limited to ~72 characters, etc.


I slightly disagree with this wording: you make it sound like we follow
the rules just because they are there. Not so: we follow the rules
because they make sense, because they make conversations more fluid:

- Limiting to 72 characters was good because a lot of terminals were 80
 columns, and it is still good because longer lines are hard to read
 but mail software still is not smart enough to rewrap text by the mile
 but not code.

- Trimmed interleaved quoting presents to the reader the exact
 information they need in the order they need it to understand the
 reply and what it is about.

In summary, the hackers culture expects the sender to spend a little
effort into making the mail easy to read for the recipient(s) while the
culture of the general population expects the sender to make as little
effort as possible and the recipient(s) to bear the burden that the
software in between cannot take, i.e. most of it.

And the “(s)” tells us which culture is more efficient and why.


The second culture are Windows users who grew up with Microsoft products
in their school or workplace.  In this culture, top-posting is the norm,
and inline quoting is nigh impossible.  Messages are often sent in either
HTML or markdown format.


Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it.


The best course of action in this case is to drop it


Indeed. But we can still discuss cultural issues relevant to
mailing-lists around it.

Regards,

--
 Nicolas George

Re: OT: Top Posting

[Andrew M.A. Cater]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote:
> how many times has this top post crap been dug up
> don't y'all have any thing better to do
> i know
> how about some real debian issues
>

Hi, 

Have a quick look at the Debian-user FAQ posted each month and the 
Debian Code of Conduct.

Both of those are real Debian issues - they're part of the way that
this mailing list operates so that people can read and understand
long threads. They also allow us to maintain smaller archives
that nonetheless retain the important information.

May I suggest that you look back at about 30 years worth of the
history here?

All the very best, as ever,

Andy
(amaca...@debian.org)
 

Re: OT: Top Posting

[Nicolas George]

Greg Wooledge (12024-05-14):
> Usenet news.  For people in this culture, there is a well-defined set
> of "netiquette" rules -- plain text messages, inline quoting with "> "
> citation characters, lines limited to ~72 characters, etc.

I slightly disagree with this wording: you make it sound like we follow
the rules just because they are there. Not so: we follow the rules
because they make sense, because they make conversations more fluid:

- Limiting to 72 characters was good because a lot of terminals were 80
  columns, and it is still good because longer lines are hard to read
  but mail software still is not smart enough to rewrap text by the mile
  but not code.

- Trimmed interleaved quoting presents to the reader the exact
  information they need in the order they need it to understand the
  reply and what it is about.

In summary, the hackers culture expects the sender to spend a little
effort into making the mail easy to read for the recipient(s) while the
culture of the general population expects the sender to make as little
effort as possible and the recipient(s) to bear the burden that the
software in between cannot take, i.e. most of it.

And the “(s)” tells us which culture is more efficient and why.

> The second culture are Windows users who grew up with Microsoft products
> in their school or workplace.  In this culture, top-posting is the norm,
> and inline quoting is nigh impossible.  Messages are often sent in either
> HTML or markdown format.

Messages in Markdown in the Windows world? I have never seen it.

> The best course of action in this case is to drop it

Indeed. But we can still discuss cultural issues relevant to
mailing-lists around it.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

Re: OT: Top Posting

[James H. H. Lampert]

On 5/14/24 10:41 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote:

We have a clash of two cultures here.


More than just *nix vs. M$.

In business communications by email, the norm is to quote the *entire* 
thread, every time, without paring anything down, purely for the sake of 
CYA. As such, top-posting is the only reasonable alternative, given that 
recipients would otherwise have to scroll through hundreds, perhaps 
thousands of lines of quoted material to find a bottom-posted reply, or 
worse, *actually read* through all that quoted material to find an 
inline-posted reply.


In list-server communications (and to a lesser extent, BBS posts), the 
norm is to pare down quoted material to the barest minimum needed to 
provide context (originally to save bandwidth and storage, both of which 
are *still* finite resources), and to bottom-post or inline-post one's 
replies, in order to give them a more natural flow. CYA doesn't factor 
in at all.


--
JHHL

Re: OT: Top Posting

[Greg Wooledge]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:01:31PM +, fxkl4...@protonmail.com wrote:
> how many times has this top post crap been dug up
> don't y'all have any thing better to do

It's never going to stop.  We have a clash of two cultures here.

The first culture are Unix users who grew up with Internet email and
Usenet news.  For people in this culture, there is a well-defined set
of "netiquette" rules -- plain text messages, inline quoting with "> "
citation characters, lines limited to ~72 characters, etc.

For users in this first group, email is often read and composed on a
terminal, or a terminal emulator.  Characters are displayed in a
fixed-width font.  ASCII art is possible, albeit frowned upon as
juvenile.

The second culture are Windows users who grew up with Microsoft products
in their school or workplace.  In this culture, top-posting is the norm,
and inline quoting is nigh impossible.  Messages are often sent in either
HTML or markdown format.  Whole paragraphs are presented as single lines.
Explicit line breaks are only used between paragraphs.

Users in this second group typically use Microsoft Outlook, or a
web-based mail user agent in a graphical environment.  Fonts are
variable-width, and any ASCII art or tables will not align properly.

Now, normally when these cultures clash, we're able to point to the
Debian netiquette guidelines, and move on.

In this particular instance, we've got a person from the second culture
who seems to have no idea that other cultures exist, or that a mailing
list might not adhere to their own expectations.  This person is acting
belligerantly, and will not listen to gentle reminders.

The best course of action in this case is to drop it, but pride can make
people do the wrong things sometimes.

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Richard]

How exactly do I do that?

Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 18:40 Uhr schrieb jeremy ardley <
jeremy.ard...@gmail.com>:

>
>  From what I can find out, the postfix local delivery agent is not
> chroot and it communicates with the main postfix processes via shared
> directories and pipes.
>
> To debug the problem I suggest checking the chroot and non chroot
> processes and eliminate those that are not relevant to the seen error
> messages
>
>

Re: OT: Top Posting

[fxkl47BF]

how many times has this top post crap been dug up
don't y'all have any thing better to do
i know
how about some real debian issues

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Nicolas George]

Alain D D Williams (12024-05-14):
> PS: check the dictionary definition of "literally".

I think you should have checked first that it makes the point you want
to make and not the opposite:

2. (degree, figuratively, proscribed, contranym) Used non-literally as
   an intensifier for figurative statements: virtually, so to speak
   (often considered incorrect; see usage notes)
3. (colloquial) Used to intensify or dramatize non-figurative
   statements.
4. (colloquial) Used as a generic downtoner: just, merely.


2. in effect : virtually—used in an exaggerated way to emphasize a
   statement or description that is not literally true or possible


* used to emphasize what you are saying:
* simply or just:


Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Alain D D Williams]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 03:11:16PM +0200, Richard wrote:
>"Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being replied
>to) is literally industry standard behavior.

Many do top post, but many do not.

Places where it is often frowned on are technical mail lists such as this one.
This is because only quoting to the parts of the mail that you reply to and
putting you comment underneath can greatly help understanding.

Read the Netiquette Guidelines (1995):

https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt

Other discussions here:

https://idallen.com/topposting.html

https://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

PS: check the dictionary definition of "literally".

-- 
Alain Williams
Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT 
Lecturer.
+44 (0) 787 668 0256  https://www.phcomp.co.uk/
Parliament Hill Computers. Registration Information: 
https://www.phcomp.co.uk/Contact.html
#include 

Re: OT: Top Posting (was: Dovecot correct ownership for logs)

[tomas]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 04:08:19PM +0200, Richard wrote:
> Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's not
> standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's called a
> setting.

Most people prefer inline quoting around here (I know I do). That's
because for big mailing lists, with long threads, it works much, much
better.

That said, we usually are tolerant of top posts. What gets me
is the hostility of your reaction. You aren't going to convince
anyone. Even not with "industry standards" [1]

As far as your main concern goes... I lost interest.

Cheers

[1] Q: How many Microsoft technicians does it take to change a
   light bulb?
A: None, they just redefine Darkness (TM) as the new industry
   standard.

https://www.linux.com/news/how-many-microsoft-technicians-does-it-take-change-light-bulb/

-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: sanity check for /etc/ssl/certs?

[Marco Moock]

Am 14.05.2024 um 16:44:05 Uhr schrieb Harald Dunkel:

> is there a sanity check for /etc/ssl/certs included in Bookworm?

Is ca-certificates installed?
If so, reinstall it.

-- 
kind regards
Marco

Send unsolicited bulk mail to 1715697845mu...@cartoonies.org

sanity check for /etc/ssl/certs?

[Harald Dunkel]

Hi folks,

is there a sanity check for /etc/ssl/certs included in Bookworm?
I've got one host with some missing symlinks in this directory, eg.

root@dpcl064:/etc/ssl/certs# ls -al *SSL.com*
ls: cannot access '*SSL.com*': No such file or directory

Other hosts show

root@dpcl082:/etc/ssl/certs# ls -al *SSL.com*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 82 Jul 16  2018 
SSL.com_EV_Root_Certification_Authority_ECC.pem -> 
/usr/share/ca-certificates/mozilla/SSL.com_EV_Root_Certification_Authority_ECC.crt
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 85 Jul 16  2018 
SSL.com_EV_Root_Certification_Authority_RSA_R2.pem -> 
/usr/share/ca-certificates/mozilla/SSL.com_EV_Root_Certification_Authority_RSA_R2.crt
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 79 Jul 16  2018 
SSL.com_Root_Certification_Authority_ECC.pem -> 
/usr/share/ca-certificates/mozilla/SSL.com_Root_Certification_Authority_ECC.crt
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 79 Jul 16  2018 
SSL.com_Root_Certification_Authority_RSA.pem -> 
/usr/share/ca-certificates/mozilla/SSL.com_Root_Certification_Authority_RSA.crt

The files in /usr/share/ca-certificates are available, of course.
The access rights seem OK. update-ca-certificates or reinstalling
ca-certificates (with overwrite) didn't solve this problem.


Every helpful comment is highly appreciated.

Harri

Re: OT: Top Posting

[Richard]

You really must think of yourself as being the epitome of human creation. I
don't see any use in continuing this nonsense. If you don't have anything
relevant to say, this case is closed for me.

Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 16:55 Uhr schrieb gene heskett :

> On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote:
> > Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's
> > not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's
> > called a setting.
> >
> No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor
> to put your reply after the question. It really is that simple. If your
> choice of email agents cannot do that, its time to switch to an agent
> that can. There are dozens of them.
>
> > Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:57 Uhr schrieb Loris Bennett
> > mailto:loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>>:
> >
> > Hi Richard,
> >
> > Richard mailto:rrosn...@gmail.com>> writes:
> >
> >  > "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being
> replied
> >  > to) is literally industry standard behavior.
> >
> > Can you provide a link to the standard you are referring to?
> >
> > Assuming such a standard exists, how would it apply to this
> newsgroup?
> >
> > [snip (51 lines)]
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Loris
> >
> > --
> > This signature is currently under constuction.
> >
>
> Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET.
> --
> "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
>   soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
> -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
> If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
>   - Louis D. Brandeis
>
>

Re: OT: Top Posting

[gene heskett]

On 5/14/24 10:09, Richard wrote:
Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's 
not standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's 
called a setting.


No its not, its your refusal to use the down arrow in your reply editor 
to put your reply after the question. It really is that simple. If your 
choice of email agents cannot do that, its time to switch to an agent 
that can. There are dozens of them.


Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:57 Uhr schrieb Loris Bennett 
mailto:loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>>:


Hi Richard,

Richard mailto:rrosn...@gmail.com>> writes:

 > "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being replied
 > to) is literally industry standard behavior.

Can you provide a link to the standard you are referring to?

Assuming such a standard exists, how would it apply to this newsgroup?

[snip (51 lines)]

Cheers,

Loris

-- 
This signature is currently under constuction.




Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET.
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis

Re: How to run automatically a script as soon root login

[Greg Wooledge]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 02:51:17PM +0200, Mario Marietto wrote:
> I've installed the Cloudflare gateway on Debian as a vm because I can't do
> it directly in FreeBSD. But I want to be covered even when I use FreeBSD.
> The script that I wrote forward the Cloudflare "VPN" from Debian to
> FreeBSD,so from outside my IP will be cloudFlared.

Disclaimer: I know nothing about Cloudflare.

So you wrote a bash script.  I will assume this script does what you
want it to.  You type its name to run it, or you have it set up to run
at boot time, or you have it set up to run at login time, or via a
cron job, or via a DHCP dhclient enter/exit hook

Where does the GOTO come in?  Do you think your script does something
internally which mimics a GOTO in some way?  Or that it *should* do that?

Why would you need a GOTO to do whatever networking configuration steps
the script does?  Lacking any knowledge of Cloudflare, I'm imagining
that the script simply performs a sequence of commands, in a linear order,
without any branching or looping or jumping around.

Serial Connection in Debian 9 Moxa Device

[Faisal Akhtar]

Hello Debian Team,
We are using Linux Debain 9 in our moxa devices.
we are connected in a network where we connect with our moxa device via ssh and 
run the commands with Gauge ip and port and get Data.
Now I'm Facing issue from 2, 3 weeks to connect the moxa using ssh and then 
connect to the serial port and get data as i getting in Telnet.
I need Your Help in this Scenario to get the data when i connect through serial 
cable.
please Let me know ASAP.
Thanks
Faisal

Re: OT: Top Posting (was: Dovecot correct ownership for logs)

[Richard]

Just because something isn't an official ISO standard doesn't mean it's not
standard behavior. And how it relates to this mailing list? It's called a
setting.

Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:57 Uhr schrieb Loris Bennett <
loris.benn...@fu-berlin.de>:

> Hi Richard,
>
> Richard  writes:
>
> > "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being replied
> > to) is literally industry standard behavior.
>
> Can you provide a link to the standard you are referring to?
>
> Assuming such a standard exists, how would it apply to this newsgroup?
>
> [snip (51 lines)]
>
> Cheers,
>
> Loris
>
> --
> This signature is currently under constuction.
>
>

OT: Top Posting (was: Dovecot correct ownership for logs)

[Loris Bennett]

Hi Richard,

Richard  writes:

> "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being replied
> to) is literally industry standard behavior.

Can you provide a link to the standard you are referring to?

Assuming such a standard exists, how would it apply to this newsgroup?

[snip (51 lines)]

Cheers,

Loris

-- 
This signature is currently under constuction.

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Henning Follmann]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 03:11:16PM +0200, Richard wrote:
> "Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being replied to)
> is literally industry standard behavior.
> 
Whatever.
It is not standard behavior in mailing lists.
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMailingLists#Posting_Rules.2C_Guidelines.2C_and_Tips

But I just asked you to not to. You can ignore that, as you do.

Good luck with your issues.

> Also, I don't think you've really cleared out any confusion. Now, how
> exactly can dovecot log to /var/log/dovecot/ without (postfix) throwing
> errors? Because it clearly is for 2 out of 3 files as visible from the file
> sizes in my original post. Only the debug file is empty, but maybe nothing
> relevant enough has been found yet. There are entries from master,
> imap, imap-login, managesieve-login, anvil and various other processes in
> info and error. But the error messages from postfix still appear, also
> seemingly at least vastly slowing down emails being delivered to the users,
> if not bringing that to a complete halt. Only after commenting out these
> locations in 10-logging.conf the mails show up for the users.
> 


-H


-- 
Henning Follmann   | hfollm...@itcfollmann.com

Re: cherche exemple gtkmm4 avec boucle d'evenement explicite et séparée

[didier gaumet]

Le 14/05/2024 à 15:23, didier gaumet a écrit :
[...]

Comment installer le Adw pour Python3 (que je ne connais pas) ?

[...]

c'est peut-être plutôt de ça qu'il s'agit? (hypothèse, j'ai pas vérifié):
https://gitlab.com/mgemmill-pypi/adw

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Richard]

And you think you're important enough to change that setting for a whole
mailing account? You're funny.

Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 15:16 Uhr schrieb Brad Rogers :

> On Tue, 14 May 2024 15:11:16 +0200
> Richard  wrote:
>
> Hello Richard,
>
> >"Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being replied
> >to) is literally industry standard behavior.
>
> This 'literally' isn't industry.
>
> --
>  Regards  _   "Valid sig separator is {dash}{dash}{space}"
>  / )  "The blindingly obvious is never immediately apparent"
> / _)rad   "Is it only me that has a working delete key?"
> Is she really going out with him?
> New Rose - The Damned
>

Re: cherche exemple gtkmm4 avec boucle d'evenement explicite et séparée

[didier gaumet]

Avertissement habituel: tout ça j'y connais rien

Le 14/05/2024 à 13:26, Basile Starynkevitch a écrit :

Bonjour la liste

je cherche un exemple d'application libre utilisant Gtkmm4 (plus simple 
qu'inkscape) ?


Il me faut une boucle d' evenement séparée de la création des fenêtres.


tu ne trouves pas ton bonheur dans les exemples fournis par la doc 
officielle (j'ai pas vérifié, j'ai juste constaté que je tombais sur une 
boucle for, mais ça ne répond peut-être pas à ton besoin):

https://gnome.pages.gitlab.gnome.org/gtkmm-documentation/chapter-building-applications.html

Par ailleurs, j'ai du mal à compiler Cambalache (le generateur de code 
pour Gtkmm4) sur Debian:


d'après la page du projet sur Gitlab 
(https://gitlab.gnome.org/jpu/cambalache), la manière conseillée 
d'installer ça est d'utiliser un paquet flatpak et il y en a un 
disponible sur le dépôt flathub


mais si tu veux installer à partir des sources faut vérifier les 
dépendances demandées sur la précitée page Gitlab (paragraphe 
"dépendances") et fouiller un peu


[...]

*Message:*  Python module*Gtk*  >= 4.14.0 found:NO  4.12.5 4.0
*Message:*  Python module*WebKit2*  >= 2.44.0 found:NO   4.1
*Message:*  Python module*WebKit*  >= 2.44.0 found:NO   6.0


apparemment pour ces trois modules, le truc les trouve mais pas 
forcément dans la bonne version


[...]

*Message:*  Python module*Adw*   found:NO   None

../meson.build:80:0:*ERROR:*  Assert failed: One or more required modules where 
not found

Comment installer le Adw pour Python3 (que je ne connais pas) ?


adw peut renvoyer à une base Oracle sur le cloud ou à la bibliothèque 
GTK Adwaita, je suppose que c'est la deuxième option donc tu peux 
chercher quelles bibliothèques libawaita*, gir1.2-adw*, etc... te sont 
nécessaires (je n'ai pas trouvé de paquets Debian qui semblent mettre en 
rapport python et adwaita)

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Brad Rogers]

On Tue, 14 May 2024 15:11:16 +0200
Richard  wrote:

Hello Richard,

>"Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being replied
>to) is literally industry standard behavior.

This 'literally' isn't industry.

-- 
 Regards  _   "Valid sig separator is {dash}{dash}{space}"
 / )  "The blindingly obvious is never immediately apparent"
/ _)rad   "Is it only me that has a working delete key?"
Is she really going out with him?
New Rose - The Damned


pgp8KT3gXNAal.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Richard]

"Top posting" (writing the answer above the text that's being replied to)
is literally industry standard behavior.

Also, I don't think you've really cleared out any confusion. Now, how
exactly can dovecot log to /var/log/dovecot/ without (postfix) throwing
errors? Because it clearly is for 2 out of 3 files as visible from the file
sizes in my original post. Only the debug file is empty, but maybe nothing
relevant enough has been found yet. There are entries from master,
imap, imap-login, managesieve-login, anvil and various other processes in
info and error. But the error messages from postfix still appear, also
seemingly at least vastly slowing down emails being delivered to the users,
if not bringing that to a complete halt. Only after commenting out these
locations in 10-logging.conf the mails show up for the users.

Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 14:54 Uhr schrieb Henning Follmann <
hfollm...@itcfollmann.com>:

> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 01:58:07PM +0200, Richard wrote:
> >
>
> Please don't top post! It is a pain to follow a thread if you do.
>
>
> > Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 13:45 Uhr schrieb Greg Wooledge <
> g...@wooledge.org>:
> >
> > > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:36:17PM +0800, jeremy ardley wrote:
> > > > Postfix is chrooted (usuallly) to /var/spool/postfix
> > >
> > > If this is true, then how would a local delivery agent work?  It needs
> > > write access to all users' inboxes, which are either in /var/mail or in
> > > users' home directories.
>
> Usually the local delivery is done by a local agent (procmail, dovecot's
> lmtp daemon). These do not run chrooted.
>
> > >
> > > I could imagine the Postfix SMTP sending/receiving and queue processing
> > > programs being chrooted, but the LDA probably isn't.  Or at least not
> > > chrooted to /var/spool/postfix.
> > >
> > >
> [fixed top posting]
> > For us the situation is even a bit stranger. The inboxes are located in
> > neither location, but in /maildirs/username/ (no idea why it was set up
> > that way, but it's a dedicated mail server where the user's don't have
> > their own home directory). /var/mail is empty.
>
> This is a common dovecot setup.
> lmtp provides a unix socket into postfix chroot environment. This process
> usually runs as postfix user so the socket is owned by postfix. But it uses
> the dovecot logging configuration.
> Having the maildirs in a dedicated directory makes it easy to have a
> dedicated drive just for the mailboxes. This makes adapting to growth much
> simpler.
>
> -H
>
>
> --
> Henning Follmann   | hfollm...@itcfollmann.com
>
>

Re: How to run automatically a script as soon root login

[Mario Marietto]

I've installed the Cloudflare gateway on Debian as a vm because I can't do
it directly in FreeBSD. But I want to be covered even when I use FreeBSD.
The script that I wrote forward the Cloudflare "VPN" from Debian to
FreeBSD,so from outside my IP will be cloudFlared.

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 1:16 PM Greg Wooledge  wrote:

> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 01:10:05PM +0200, Mario Marietto wrote:
> > Your answer does not help me to understand how to use a "structured
> > programming / if , while, for, functions" for the specific task that I
> want
> > to achieve.
>
> What task is that?
>
>

-- 
Mario.

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[tomas]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 02:11:53PM +0200, Richard wrote:

[...]

> Setting the permissions in /var/log/dovecot to 666 actually didn't
> solve the problem [...]

This seems to prove (or, at least, strongly suggest) that I was barking
up the wrong tree. I've currently run out of trees and at $DAYJOB, so
tight on resources. Good luck :)

Cheers
-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Richard]

>
> ps -eo pid,user,group,comm | grep postfix
> 2886706 postfix  postfix  pickup
> 2886707 postfix  postfix  qmgr
> 2886764 postfix  postfix  tlsmgr

Also as far as I know, postfix logs to syslog too. At least there is no
dedicated file or folder for it in /var/log.

Setting the permissions in /var/log/dovecot to 666 actually didn't
solve the problem, which just opens a whole other bunch of questions. So in
case that for some odd reason AppArmor logs aren't logged to syslog (and
also it doesn't have a dedicated file), these are the rules for dovecot and
postfix I could find:
postfix has an apparmor (in abstractions) file that doesn't say anything
about /var/log. It only has these rules for things in /var:

/var/spool/postfix/etc/*r,
/var/spool/postfix/lib/lib*.so* mr,
/var/spool/postfix/lib/@{multiarch}/lib*.so* mr,

Dovecot has two files. In tunables you can find this:
# @{DOVECOT_MAILSTORE} is a space-separated list of all directories
# where dovecot is allowed to store and read mails
#
# The default value is quite broad to avoid breaking existing setups.
# Please change @{DOVECOT_MAILSTORE} to (only) contain the directory
# you use, and remove everything else.

@{DOVECOT_MAILSTORE}=@{HOME}/Maildir/ @{HOME}/mail/ @{HOME}/Mail/
/var/vmail/ /var/mail/ /var/spool/mail

Which doesn't seem to be relevant for this. No idea how dovecot can put the
mail into /maildirs/username, but since that's working I'm not complaining.
The file in abstractions only contains this:
# used with dovecot/*

  abi ,

  capability setgid,

  deny capability block_suspend,

  # dovecot's master can send us signals
  signal receive peer=dovecot,

  owner @{run}/dovecot/config rw,

  # Include additions to the abstraction
  include if exists 

Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 13:45 Uhr schrieb :

> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 01:29:17PM +0200, Richard wrote:
> > My guess is that postfix runs as postfix.
>
> That would be my guess too (or perhaps as some special "Debian-+postfix".
>
> > At least processes like local,
> > smtpd, bounce etc run as that user. But beyond that I have no idea how to
> > find that out. At least there's nothing in the postfix.service or
> > postfix@.service
> > about that. So I've changed the files to dovecot:postfix 664, but same
> > error.
>
> You might try
>
>   ps -eo pid,user,group,comm | grep postfix
>
> or similar. Or have a look at Posrfix's log file ownerships.
>
> You might try making the log files in question world writable just
> to see whether the problem disappears or this approach is a blind
> alley (don't forget to revert that: leaving them world-writable
> seems like asking for trouble).
>
> Cheers
> --
> t
>

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Florent Rougon]

Le 14/05/2024, to...@tuxteam.de a écrit:

> You might try
>
>   ps -eo pid,user,group,comm | grep postfix
>
> or similar.

Yep, and beware that the original message mentions a postfix program
named 'local' (/usr/lib/postfix/sbin/local).

> May 13 20:55:37 mail postfix/local[2824184]: (...)

Regards

-- 
Florent

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Richard]

For us the situation is even a bit stranger. The inboxes are located in
neither location, but in /maildirs/username/ (no idea why it was set up
that way, but it's a dedicated mail server where the user's don't have
their own home directory). /var/mail is empty.

Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 13:45 Uhr schrieb Greg Wooledge :

> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:36:17PM +0800, jeremy ardley wrote:
> > Postfix is chrooted (usuallly) to /var/spool/postfix
>
> If this is true, then how would a local delivery agent work?  It needs
> write access to all users' inboxes, which are either in /var/mail or in
> users' home directories.
>
> I could imagine the Postfix SMTP sending/receiving and queue processing
> programs being chrooted, but the LDA probably isn't.  Or at least not
> chrooted to /var/spool/postfix.
>
>

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[jeremy ardley]

On 14/5/24 19:44, Greg Wooledge wrote:

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:36:17PM +0800, jeremy ardley wrote:

Postfix is chrooted (usuallly) to /var/spool/postfix

If this is true, then how would a local delivery agent work?  It needs
write access to all users' inboxes, which are either in /var/mail or in
users' home directories.

I could imagine the Postfix SMTP sending/receiving and queue processing
programs being chrooted, but the LDA probably isn't.  Or at least not
chrooted to /var/spool/postfix.

From what I can find out, the postfix local delivery agent is not 
chroot and it communicates with the main postfix processes via shared 
directories and pipes.


To debug the problem I suggest checking the chroot and non chroot 
processes and eliminate those that are not relevant to the seen error 
messages

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[tomas]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:36:17PM +0800, jeremy ardley wrote:

[...]

> Postfix is chrooted (usuallly) to /var/spool/postfix
> 
> If postfix complains about /var/log/dovecot it's actually complaining about
> /var/spool/postfix/var/log/dovecot

I'm sceptical about this -- the error would have been ENOENT, not EPERM
(because an intervening directory would be missing).

But of course, I might be wrong.

Cheers
-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[tomas]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 01:29:17PM +0200, Richard wrote:
> My guess is that postfix runs as postfix.

That would be my guess too (or perhaps as some special "Debian-+postfix".

> At least processes like local,
> smtpd, bounce etc run as that user. But beyond that I have no idea how to
> find that out. At least there's nothing in the postfix.service or
> postfix@.service
> about that. So I've changed the files to dovecot:postfix 664, but same
> error.

You might try

  ps -eo pid,user,group,comm | grep postfix

or similar. Or have a look at Posrfix's log file ownerships.

You might try making the log files in question world writable just
to see whether the problem disappears or this approach is a blind
alley (don't forget to revert that: leaving them world-writable
seems like asking for trouble).

Cheers
-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Greg Wooledge]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:36:17PM +0800, jeremy ardley wrote:
> Postfix is chrooted (usuallly) to /var/spool/postfix

If this is true, then how would a local delivery agent work?  It needs
write access to all users' inboxes, which are either in /var/mail or in
users' home directories.

I could imagine the Postfix SMTP sending/receiving and queue processing
programs being chrooted, but the LDA probably isn't.  Or at least not
chrooted to /var/spool/postfix.

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[jeremy ardley]

On 14/5/24 19:17, Richard wrote:
But why should it cause issues? I set the logging in dovecot's conf.d, 
so I'd expect dovecot to write these logs, not postfix as it has its 
own settings.


Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 05:00 Uhr schrieb jeremy ardley 
:



On 14/5/24 04:16, Richard wrote:
> Maybe someone here knows how the ownership of these files for
Dovecot
> needs to be in order to work, as various distributions of Dovecot
> packages seem to use different users:
> I'd like Dovecot not to log into syslog, but to dedicated files.
> Therefore I've created the directory /var/log/dovecot and told
dovecot
> in 10-logging.conf to log info, debug and error messages to
separate
> files.  But I get error messages from postfix (weird):


A possible cause of problems between postfix and dovecot is that
postfix
usuallly runs chroot so the file tree it sees is not the same as
the one
the rest of the system sees.



Postfix is chrooted (usuallly) to /var/spool/postfix

If postfix complains about /var/log/dovecot it's actually complaining 
about /var/spool/postfix/var/log/dovecot


I would check that file/directory and how dovecot and postfix interact 
with it.

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Richard]

My guess is that postfix runs as postfix. At least processes like local,
smtpd, bounce etc run as that user. But beyond that I have no idea how to
find that out. At least there's nothing in the postfix.service or
postfix@.service
about that. So I've changed the files to dovecot:postfix 664, but same
error.

Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 06:34 Uhr schrieb :

> On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 10:16:13PM +0200, Richard wrote:
> > Maybe someone here knows how the ownership of these files for Dovecot
> needs
> > to be in order to work, as various distributions of Dovecot packages seem
> > to use different users:
> > I'd like Dovecot not to log into syslog, but to dedicated files.
> Therefore
> > I've created the directory /var/log/dovecot and told dovecot in
> > 10-logging.conf to log info, debug and error messages to separate files.
> > But I get error messages from postfix (weird):
>
> I think this Dovecot's LDA (the local delivery agent) [1], which is
> invoked by the MTA (Postfix) and is, therefore, most probably running
> as postfix.
>
> [...]
>
> > > (temporary failure. Command output: lda(user): Error:
> > > net_connect_unix(/run/dovecot/stats-writer) failed: Permission denied
> Can't
> > > open log file /var/log/dovecot/error.log: Permission denied )
>
> This message actually is an indicator against the chroot theory posed
> elsewhere in this thread (in a chroot, you would get "no such file or
> directory", I guess).
> >
> > This is the content of /var/log/dovecot:
> > -rw-r--r--  1 dovecot dovecot0 13. Mai 20:50 debug.log
> > -rw-r--r--  1 dovecot dovecot  880 13. Mai 21:21 error.log
> > -rw-r--r--  1 dovecot dovecot  40K 13. Mai 21:20 info.log
>
> Try to set the log file's group to mail (or whatever group Postfix is
> running as) and make them group writable.
>
> Cheers
> --
> t
>

cherche exemple gtkmm4 avec boucle d'evenement explicite et séparée

[Basile Starynkevitch]

Bonjour la liste

je cherche un exemple d'application libre utilisant Gtkmm4 (plus simple 
qu'inkscape) ?


Il me faut une boucle d' evenement séparée de la création des fenêtres.

Par ailleurs, j'ai du mal à compiler Cambalache (le generateur de code 
pour Gtkmm4) sur Debian:



Build dir:*/usr/src/X11/cambalache/_Build*
Build type:*native build*
Project name:*cambalache*
Project version:*0.91.0*
C compiler for the host machine:*ccache cc*  (gcc 13.2.0 "cc (Debian 13.2.0-24) 
13.2.0")
C linker for the host machine:*cc*  ld.bfd 2.42
Host machine cpu family:*x86_64*
Host machine cpu:*x86_64*
Program python3 found:*YES*  (/usr/bin/python3)
*Message:*  Python module*lxml*  >= 4.5.0 found:YES  5.1.0 None
*Message:*  Python module*gi*  >= 3.48.0 found:YES  3.48.2 None
*Message:*  Python module*GLib*  >= 2.80.0 found:YES  2.80.2 None
*Message:*  Python module*Gtk*  >= 3.24.0 found:YES  3.24.41 3.0
*Message:*  Python module*Gtk*  >= 4.14.0 found:NO  4.12.5 4.0
*Message:*  Python module*WebKit2*  >= 2.44.0 found:NO   4.1
*Message:*  Python module*WebKit*  >= 2.44.0 found:NO   6.0
*Message:*  Python module*GtkSource*   found:YES  5.12.0 5
*Message:*  Python module*Handy*   found:YES   None
*Message:*  Python module*Adw*   found:NO   None

../meson.build:80:0:*ERROR:*  Assert failed: One or more required modules where 
not found



Comment installer le Adw pour Python3 (que je ne connais pas) ?


Merci de vos lumières!


Librement


--
Basile Starynkevitch
(only mine opinions / les opinions sont miennes uniquement)
8 rue de la Faïencerie, 92340 Bourg-la-Reine, France
web page: starynkevitch.net/Basile/
See/voir:https://github.com/RefPerSys/RefPerSys

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Richard]

AppArmor complaints would be shown in journalctl too. But dmseg doesn't
show anything either. Just switched dovecot back to these log files, waited
for the error message, yet dmesg doesn't have anything new since yesterday.
Systemd was also my guess as it was originally set to ProtectSystem=full
for dovecot.service, but reducing that to yes didn't change anything.

These are the in the Service block of the service, maybe you see anything
that could be a reason too:
[Service]
Type=notify
ExecStart=/usr/sbin/dovecot -F
ExecReload=/usr/bin/doveadm reload
ExecStop=/usr/bin/doveadm stop
PrivateTmp=true
NonBlocking=yes
ProtectSystem=yes
ProtectHome=no
PrivateDevices=true
Restart=on-failure

Best
Richard

Am Mo., 13. Mai 2024 um 22:28 Uhr schrieb Greg Wooledge :

> On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 10:16:13PM +0200, Richard wrote:
> > May 13 20:55:37 mail postfix/local[2824184]: 95BCF1000A9: to=<
> u...@domain.de>,
> > > relay=local, delay=3.2, delays=1.9/0.29/0/1.1, dsn=4.3.0,
> status=deferred
> > > (temporary failure. Command output: lda(user): Error:
> > > net_connect_unix(/run/dovecot/stats-writer) failed: Permission denied
> Can't
> > > open log file /var/log/dovecot/error.log: Permission denied )
> >
> > This is the content of /var/log/dovecot:
> > -rw-r--r--  1 dovecot dovecot0 13. Mai 20:50 debug.log
> > -rw-r--r--  1 dovecot dovecot  880 13. Mai 21:21 error.log
> > -rw-r--r--  1 dovecot dovecot  40K 13. Mai 21:20 info.log
>
> The first two things that come to mind are AppArmor, and systemd unit
> files.
>
> Check to see whether there's an AppArmor profile for this program, or
> any lines from AppArmor in dmesg.
>
> If that's not it, look at the systemd unit file(s) that start the
> dovecot service(s), if there are any, and see if they're using any of
> the directives that restrict the locations the program can access.
>
>

Re: Dovecot correct ownership for logs

[Richard]

But why should it cause issues? I set the logging in dovecot's conf.d, so
I'd expect dovecot to write these logs, not postfix as it has its own
settings.

Am Di., 14. Mai 2024 um 05:00 Uhr schrieb jeremy ardley <
jeremy.ard...@gmail.com>:

>
> On 14/5/24 04:16, Richard wrote:
> > Maybe someone here knows how the ownership of these files for Dovecot
> > needs to be in order to work, as various distributions of Dovecot
> > packages seem to use different users:
> > I'd like Dovecot not to log into syslog, but to dedicated files.
> > Therefore I've created the directory /var/log/dovecot and told dovecot
> > in 10-logging.conf to log info, debug and error messages to separate
> > files.  But I get error messages from postfix (weird):
>
>
> A possible cause of problems between postfix and dovecot is that postfix
> usuallly runs chroot so the file tree it sees is not the same as the one
> the rest of the system sees.
>
>

Re: How to run automatically a script as soon root login

[Greg Wooledge]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 01:10:05PM +0200, Mario Marietto wrote:
> Your answer does not help me to understand how to use a "structured
> programming / if , while, for, functions" for the specific task that I want
> to achieve.

What task is that?

Re: How to run automatically a script as soon root login

[Mario Marietto]

Your answer does not help me to understand how to use a "structured
programming / if , while, for, functions" for the specific task that I want
to achieve. I failed using "your" lovely structured programming and that's
the reason why I'm asking for some hint to understand why and how I can use
it. Your answer puts the finger on the spot and isn't helpful, also because
it says things that I already knew.


On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 1:03 PM Greg Wooledge  wrote:

> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 08:09:18AM +0200, Mario Marietto wrote:
> > Nobody can show a different way,a modern way, for creating my script ?
> Why
> > did I feel so comfortable by recreating the 1960s GOTO statement in Bash
> ?
>
> I have absolutely no clue what you're trying to do or why you're trying
> to do it, but I *promise* you, whatever you think you're doing, you
> have NOT recreated a GOTO statement in bash.
>
> You showed a function.  Functions can be called.  This is NOT the same
> as issuing a GOTO command, because once the function returns, control
> flow resumes from the point where it was called.
>
> Bash (and sh, on which bash is based) explicitly chose not to have a GOTO
> statement in its language.  The authors chose instead to use the control
> primitives that are collectively known as "structured programming"
> (if, while, for, functions).
>
>

-- 
Mario.

Re: How to run automatically a script as soon root login

[Greg Wooledge]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 08:09:18AM +0200, Mario Marietto wrote:
> Nobody can show a different way,a modern way, for creating my script ? Why
> did I feel so comfortable by recreating the 1960s GOTO statement in Bash ?

I have absolutely no clue what you're trying to do or why you're trying
to do it, but I *promise* you, whatever you think you're doing, you
have NOT recreated a GOTO statement in bash.

You showed a function.  Functions can be called.  This is NOT the same
as issuing a GOTO command, because once the function returns, control
flow resumes from the point where it was called.

Bash (and sh, on which bash is based) explicitly chose not to have a GOTO
statement in its language.  The authors chose instead to use the control
primitives that are collectively known as "structured programming"
(if, while, for, functions).

Re: sudo echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward [was: How to run automatically a script as soon root login]

[tomas]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 04:54:26PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
> 
> Wasn't sudo echo the name of a pop group?
> 
> :)

If it wasn't it should've been one.

Cheers
-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: sudo echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward [was: How to run automatically a script as soon root login]

[Bret Busby]

Wasn't sudo echo the name of a pop group?

:)



Bret Busby
Armadale
Western Australia
(UTC+0800)
.

Re: How to run automatically a script as soon root login

[tomas]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 08:09:18AM +0200, Mario Marietto wrote:
> Nobody can show a different way,a modern way, for creating my script ? Why
> did I feel so comfortable by recreating the 1960s GOTO statement in Bash ?

I think your style is too alien to most of the people here to
make them feel their time is worth trying to wrap their heads
around it (I just got a rough feeling on how it works, asked
myself "Why?" and went on).

You'll have to go it alone if you chose such an idiosyncratic
style, it seems.

Cheers
-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: How to run automatically a script as soon root login

[Mario Marietto]

Nobody can show a different way,a modern way, for creating my script ? Why
did I feel so comfortable by recreating the 1960s GOTO statement in Bash ?

On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 6:30 PM Will Mengarini  wrote:

> Nobody has yet applauded this glorious implementation
> of the 1960s GOTO statement in *Bash*?!
>
> * Mario Marietto  [24-05/13=Mo 13:37 +0200]:
> > function jumpto
> > {
> > label=$1
> > cmd=$(sed -n "/$label:/{:a;n;p;ba};" $0 | grep -v ':$')
> > eval "$cmd"
> > exit
> > }
>
> Anyway, Marietto, you've got two typi:
>
> > mid :
> That should be "mid:".
>
> > jump foo
> That should be "jumpto foo".
>
> Once you've got your root-login script working, I hope you
> move on to implementing a complete open-source PL/I compiler.
>


-- 
Mario.