Re: supervise: fatal: unable to acquire log/supervise/lock

[lluisma]

Peter Janett wrote:

> I have been installing Qmail on a new Solaris box.  I have gone through the

Solaris 7? or 8?
What C compiler?
Show me your PATH.

I was able to make it to work on 7 but not on 8.

>
> install instructions at:
> http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#installation
>
> I installed the startup script located at:
> http://Web.InfoAve.net/~dsill/qmail-script-dt61.txt
>
> Things seemed to be going fine until I tried to start qmail with:
> /usr/local/sbin/qmail start
>
> I get the following every few seconds, over and over, until I kill the
> svscan ID:
>
> supervise: fatal: unable to acquire log/supervise/lock: temporary failure
> supervise: fatal: unable to acquire qmail-smtpd/supervise/lock: temporary
> failure
> supervise: fatal: unable to acquire log/supervise/lock: temporary failure
>
> I checked the archives, and found a few similar errors, but they said
> "permission denied" where I am getting "temporary failure".
>
> Any help GREATLY appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Peter Janett
>
> New Media One Web Services
>   ~Professional results with a personal touch~
>   http://www.newmediaone.net
>   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   (303)828-9882

supervise: fatal: unable to acquire log/supervise/lock

[Peter Janett]

I have been installing Qmail on a new Solaris box.  I have gone through the
install instructions at:
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#installation

I installed the startup script located at:
http://Web.InfoAve.net/~dsill/qmail-script-dt61.txt

Things seemed to be going fine until I tried to start qmail with:
/usr/local/sbin/qmail start

I get the following every few seconds, over and over, until I kill the
svscan ID:

supervise: fatal: unable to acquire log/supervise/lock: temporary failure
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire qmail-smtpd/supervise/lock: temporary
failure
supervise: fatal: unable to acquire log/supervise/lock: temporary failure

I checked the archives, and found a few similar errors, but they said
"permission denied" where I am getting "temporary failure".

Any help GREATLY appreciated.

Thanks,

Peter Janett

New Media One Web Services
  ~Professional results with a personal touch~
  http://www.newmediaone.net
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  (303)828-9882

Mini-survey on RFC 1651/1869 compliancy

[Andrzej Kukula]

I don't see this topic discussed in the list archive.

When sending a mail message from some ESMTP clients to some ESMTP servers,
and the network or the server is highly congested, it is possible that the
message will be deferred as a result of RFC 1651/1869 inherent bug that
leads to "503 Duplicate HELO/EHLO" from an ESMTP server.

The following ia an example of an ESMTP session. C stands for an ESMTP
client, S for an ESMTP server implementing that buggy behavior:

S: 220 [greeting]
C: EHLO client.example.org  [tries to negotiate ESMTP]
S: [not responding in expected time]
C: HELO client.example.org  [tries to estabilish plain SMTP]
S: 250-server.example.org   [responds to the EHLO]
S: 250-[ESMTP features]
S: 250 8BITMIME
S: 503 Duplicate HELO/EHLO  [responds to the HELO]
C: QUIT

Exchange Server SMTP Service version 5.5 is an example of client working
that way. It tries to negotiate ESMTP features where available (e.g. to not
attempt to send message when its size exceeds RFC 1427's SIZE), or sends
message via plain SMTP otherwise.


The bug in RFC 1869 may be explained as follows:

1. RFC 1869 extends RFC 821 (look at p. 4.1).

2. RFC 821 p. 4.1.1 (page 27) allows using HELO multiple times during
   a session. RFC 821 p. 4.1.1 (page 19) defines conditions under which
   HELO returns positive or negative response.

3. RFC 1869 p. 4.2 says an EHLO may be issued at any time that a HELO
   would be appropriate.

4. RFC 1869 p. 4.2 then denies itself saying that after a successful
   server response to first EHLO, all subsequent HELO/EHLOs must return
   error 503.


Here are my own mini-survey on (E)SMTP servers and their buggy-RFC-1869
behavior:

+---+-+
| (E)SMTP server software name  | RFC 1869 bug?   |
+---+-+
| qmail 1.03| no  |
| ZMailer 2.99.52-patch1| no  |
| Exim 2.12 | no  |
| MS SMTP Mail 5.5.*| no  |
| MailShield SMTPCisco SMTP Gateway | no  |
| America Online mail version 71.10 | no  |
| HotMail ESMTP server  | no  |
| Lotus Domino 5.0.2a ESMTP Service | no  |
+---+-+
| sendmail 8.8.8, 8.9.1, 8.9.3  | YES |
| Postfix up to snapshot 2309   | YES |
| Mercury 1.44  | YES |
| Rayan S. Zachariassen ESMTP Server (mail.net) | YES |
+---+-+
| CheckPoint FireWall-1 Secure SMTP Server  | plain SMTP only |
| MudMail 1.71  | plain SMTP only |
| GroupWise Internet Agent 5.5.3.1  | plain SMTP only |
+---+-+

"no" in the second column means that the server allows multiple HELOs/EHLOs
per session. "YES" means the server is affected by the issue. "Plain SMTP
only" means EHLO wasn't accepted by the server.


As you know, qmail accepts mail from client that doesn't issue HELO/EHLO at
all. Now it is clear that qmail also accepts mail when others fail.


Regards,
Andrzej Kukula

Re: Vapormail (was: Re: Problem: 552 max. message size exceeded)

[Frank D. Cringle]

Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Soffen, Matthew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I mean, How do you go from postfix to mail server (at least qmail and
> >sendmail have the word MAIL in their titles).
> 
> Well, "post" is "mail", and "fix", well, I guess that means it fixes
> mail problems (namely sendmail :-).

"fix" is colloquial for "quick" or "snappy" in German and possibly also in 
Dutch.  Maybe that influenced Wietse's choice.

-- 
Frank Cringle,  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
voice: (+49 2304) 467101; fax: 943357

SMTPd questions...

[Scott D. Yelich]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-


(1) Is it better to write an SMTPd that is strict to the RFCs or
lenient?  That is, where does one go to settle disputes -- or is it
better to sit back and miss mail due to differences in interpreting
the RFCs?  Ie: if an smtpd accepts bare linefeeds, etc., is that
really all that bad on incoming? what about then when sending mail,
should one write a "smart" sender, or just a simple one
that tries to be as standard as possible?

(2) Are there any tools to thoroughly test a prospective SMTPd
against RFC compliance?  Is anyone interested in such a tool?

(3) qmail accepts "mail from:" and "rcpt to:" without parameters.  The
"data" command is then allowed, a message body can be entered, and is
accepted with a 250 after the dot line.  Is this correct?



-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBOO+B/lpGPE+AF6qBAQHUEwP/W4ItK1J3Rl8szGaTI+hAG0yaVy+5Rtn4
ntdY/LFlIe/riMQAZfm9l14CxXtHp/oWt1KC3SyPsG2HCH3Z/uKMOE7j4MqUzROG
AjRkq+9P4bZMfgF/VcGrj2HfK7cm68opED+UUPSRkuCbb9zGQhNm4U0uZQ5tyNnL
Qsd2u7IwVMQ=
=Q/sk
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

re : account locking

[Shaun Gibson]

configuration :

qmail and qmail ldap patch
qmail pop3d

how about this :

- add a status entry for ldap
- if the entry is set create a dummy maildir with one new email
   (this means that all mail to the locked mailbox will still be
delivered but will be unavailable until the status entry from ldap is
reset)
- have a script to clean up all the dummy maildirs

-- 
Shaun Gibson

Associate Unix and NT System Adminstrator  Tel :
+27-11-2667800 ext 8023
Intekom, Midrand, South Africa
---

Re: Doubts: qmail and IMAP

[Claus Färber]

Gilberto Rodrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote:
> 1. I'm following the BUILD doc and according to it, I should install the
> pop2d, pop3d and imapd daemons in a system directory of my choosing. Is
> it necessary to install the pop2d and pop3d daemons? What are they for?
> Must all of them be running even if I wanna have only IMAP protocol?

Of course not.

> 2. According to the docs, I should update inetd.conf to invoke the
> daemons. I guess I could use tcpserver instead of editing it. Is it
> correct? Does IMAP daemon have to appear before qmail's dameons in init
> scripts?

No, it does not matter: qmail can run without imapd and vice-versa. They  
can even be on different machines (if the maildir is mounted in some way  
on both).

-- 
Claus Andre Faerber 
PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E  25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC

Re: HELO in

[Claus Färber]

A. Yahya Sjarifuddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote:
> Is there any incomptability with Lotus or just wrong setting?
> Thanks for any help.
>
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> Connected to 202.103.147.133 but sender was rejected.
>>> Remote host said: 500 Session already established. The domain name
>>[smtp-a.cbn.net.id] passed in with HELO will be ignored. The current domain
>>name of sending SMTP is [www.wtwh.com.cn].

The software that produced this error message is not SMTP-compliant.  
Tell them to use software that conforms to accepted internet standard if  
they want to receive email.

-- 
Claus Andre Faerber 
PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E  25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC

qmail Digest 8 Apr 2000 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 965

[qmail-digest-help]

qmail Digest 8 Apr 2000 10:00:01 - Issue 965

Topics (messages 39713 through 39767):

qmail-remote processes
39713 by: Ricardo D. Albano
39714 by: Uwe Ohse

Re: domain name with dash
39715 by: Dave Sill

Doubts: qmail and IMAP
39716 by: Gilberto Rodrigues
39717 by: Russell P. Sutherland
39718 by: Dave Sill

Strange Problems whith starting qmail
39719 by: root
39745 by: Dave Sill

locking out mail accounts ...
39720 by: Shaun Gibson
39726 by: rogers-qmail.h0050da615e79.ne.mediaone.net
39738 by: Aaron L. Meehan
39739 by: Aled Treharne
39742 by: Aaron L. Meehan
39765 by: Robert Sanderson

Yahoo still down?
39721 by: Bill Luckett
39722 by: octave klaba
39723 by: Bryan White

Re: funny
39724 by: Mate Wierdl
39727 by: Adam McKenna
39728 by: Chris Garrigues

Re: Understanding "To" and "From"
39725 by: Dave Kitabjian
39748 by: Dave Sill

qmail initiating identd lookups?
39729 by: brianb-qmail.technet.evoserve.com
39732 by: Charles Cazabon
39734 by: Bruno Wolff III

Local mail for virtual domains
39730 by: Jay Moore
39731 by: Russell P. Sutherland

Re: HELO in
39733 by: Markus Stumpf

Vapormail (was: Re: Problem: 552 max. message size exceeded)
39735 by: Aaron L. Meehan
39736 by: Soffen, Matthew
39741 by: Dave Sill

Unable to configure IMAP client
39737 by: Gilberto Rodrigues
39744 by: Dave Sill

new qmail install, man page question
39740 by: John W. Lemons III
39743 by: Magnus Bodin

Re: qmail-remote don't lunch
39746 by: Dave Sill

Re: qmail-smtpd/message parsing
39747 by: Dave Sill
39749 by: Dave Sill

Re: Relay allow
39750 by: Rogerio Brito

Off Topic: call a perl script
39751 by: Carlo Gibertini
39752 by: Jedi/Sector One
39753 by: Jedi/Sector One

Re: more qmail-remote
39754 by: Irwan Hadi

Re: qmailqueue patch?
39755 by: Irwan Hadi

Re: VPOPMAIL
39756 by: Irwan Hadi

Sorry, no mailbox (unusual)
39757 by: Kins Orekhov

quick question (qmail-1.03)
39758 by: Keith Warno
39762 by: Charles Cazabon

quick answer (qmail-1.03)
39759 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen

Is any thing wrong with this page
39760 by: bigkapusta.kapusta.com
39761 by: Charles Cazabon
39763 by: bigkapusta.kapusta.com
39764 by: bigkapusta.kapusta.com

problems with mercur/wsendmail/qmail
39766 by: Dale Anderson
39767 by: Uwe Ohse

Administrivia:

To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


--



I can't set my qmail server to maximize the number of simultaneous
qmail-remote procs. I can't get more than 20 simul. procs., I was created
the file /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote   with the value 60.

What's wrong ?

RDA.-





On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 07:06:39PM -0300, Ricardo D. Albano wrote:
> I can't set my qmail server to maximize the number of simultaneous
> qmail-remote procs. I can't get more than 20 simul. procs., I was created
> the file /var/qmail/control/concurrencyremote   with the value 60.

you need to restart qmail-send after certain configuration file
modifications. see the manual page for more information.

Regards, Uwe




"kapusta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>~user/.qmail-default is getting confusing I got response that I need to have
>~user/.qmail-domain to be able to get e-mail and .qmail-default is like
>whild card
>and it worked until I started create more users for this domain
>does anybody wrote something that make sense about virtual domains and
>aliases

I think:

  http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#virtual-domains

is pretty clear. What you seem to be missing is how virtual deliveries
are redirected and how .qmail files work. If you have a virtualdomains
entry like:

  example.com:john-example

A message sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] will be redirected to
john-example-info. In order to "catch" that mail, you'll need one of:

  ~john/.qmail-example-info
  ~john/.qmail-example-default
  ~john/.qmail-default
  ~alias/.qmail-john-example-info
  ~alias/.qmail-john-example-default
  ~alias/.qmail-john-default
  ~alias/.qmail-default

(And these are listed in the order qmail-local will look for them.)
The ~alias .qmail files will only be used if "john" isn't a valid
qmail user.

-Dave




I want to use qmail, maildirs and IMAP to config a mail server. I
installed qmail v1.03, daemontools and ucspi-tcp packages and everything
is running ok. I downloaded UW-IMAP 4.7b, compiled it, applied David
Harris patch and build it. Ok, now it's

Re: problems with mercur/wsendmail/qmail

[Uwe Ohse]

On Sat, Apr 08, 2000 at 12:57:34AM -0700, Dale Anderson wrote:
 
> I have a utility on my web server called wsendmail.exe that's used for

wsendmail is a piece of bad software.

> exist at all. Is there any known reason for this? I thought it might have
> something to do with the way that the wsendmail program formats the headers
> in the message.

wsendmail violates the SMTP protocol by not sending a CR/LF (\r\n) at
the end of the all lines.
You might want to replace wsendmail with something not so stupid.
Otherwise you could use fixcrio from the ucspi-tcp package.

Regards, Uwe

problems with mercur/wsendmail/qmail

[Dale Anderson]

I have a utility on my web server called wsendmail.exe that's used for
turning forms on web pages into email messages. The program that fails to
work for delivering messages to any qmail server. Other mailing exe's work
fine, it's just wsendmail. Our mail server is Mercur and the failure notice
I get back just says the mail is undeliverable, as if the mail server didn't
exist at all. Is there any known reason for this? I thought it might have
something to do with the way that the wsendmail program formats the headers
in the message.

Dale Anderson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: locking out mail accounts ...

[Robert Sanderson]

Shaun,

Try something like this,

Create a root owned Maildir with world read access:

#mkdir /etc/pop3lock
#mkdir /etc/pop3lock/users
#/var/qmail/bin/maildirmake /etc/pop3lock/Maildir
#chmod -R +rx /etc/pop3lock

Add the e-mail message you want the user to retrieve to /etc/pop3lock/Maildir/new/ and
make the file world readable.

Create the file /var/qmail/bin/pop3mail with the following contents:

#!/bin/sh
if [ -e "/etc/pop3lock/users/$USER" ]; then
  exec /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d /etc/pop3lock/Maildir
else
  exec /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d $1
fi


Make this file executable:

#chmod +x /var/qmail/bin/pop3mail


Replace /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d with /var/qmail/bin/pop3mail in the command that
starts you pop3 service.  Restart your pop3 service.

To lock a user's account create a file in /etc/pop3lock/users named the same as the
user's account name:

#touch /etc/pop3lock/users/shaung


With the file in place the user will only retrieve the 'account locked' message that
you created each time they check their mail.

Remove the file to unlock their account:

#rm /etc/pop3lock/users/shaung


This is only one of many, many ways to do this.   I welcome your feedback.

Bob

Shaun Gibson wrote:

> Hi there
>
> I need to do the following :
>
> - lock a mailbox (without deleting it or the mail contained in it)
> - if a user tries to access a mailbox locked like this all they get back
> when trying to collect mail is a preset 'call support to re-enable this
> mailbox'.
>
> Suggestions anyone ?
>
> --
> Shaun Gibson
> 
> Associate Unix and NT System Adminstrator  Tel :
> +27-11-2667800 ext 8023
> Intekom, Midrand, South Africa
> ---

--
Robert Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ETRN.com, Inc. - The Internet Answering Service.
http://www.ETRN.com