Re: Volunteers for a multilog patch?
On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 08:03:04AM +1000, Brett Randall wrote: If you insist on just one file per time period (day) then you'll need to discourage multilog from automatically rolling by making the size setting absurdly large. Of course by doing this you remove a major advantage of multilog, namely resource control. Resource control is a nice idea, but really I mean how many admins have way more than enough disk space to handle logs? Even if a day's mail log reached 50mb (we have about 200 users, so this figure is pretty damn huge for one day), then on a standard 9gb drive we can still fit 180 days logs, not On my popserver (which does local deliveries, forwards, and some big alias expansions) with just under 40.000 users, I *normally* do about 40mb a day, but one fat mailbomb (which happens too often) and that number easily grows to a 100-200. Greetz, Peter -- dataloss networks '/ignore-ance is bliss' - me
qmail Digest 8 Oct 2000 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 1147
qmail Digest 8 Oct 2000 10:00:01 - Issue 1147 Topics (messages 50149 through 50176): Re: qmail-ldap-help 50149 by: Alexander Jernejcic Re: 4 messages stuck in Q - how can I rm them? 50150 by: Alexander Jernejcic Re: Configuration/user setup issues- can't find user 50151 by: Alexander Jernejcic Pager notification of new mail 50152 by: jim 50153 by: Olivier M. 50154 by: Vince Vielhaber 50155 by: Andy Bradford 50163 by: jim 50169 by: Olivier M. 50170 by: Vince Vielhaber 50174 by: jim Re: qmail list reply-to 50156 by: Russell Nelson 50157 by: Neil Blakey-Milner 50158 by: Russell Nelson 50159 by: Charles McLagan 50160 by: Neil Blakey-Milner 50164 by: Russell Nelson 50166 by: Ronny Haryanto 50167 by: Andy Bradford 50173 by: Raul Miller ORBS 50161 by: Mark Walsh 50168 by: Brett Randall benchmark programs 50162 by: Frans Haarman 50175 by: Bruce Guenter Re: tcpserver 50165 by: jim Re: Help with my girlfriend? 50171 by: Scott D. Yelich Can't switch to queue directory. 50172 by: Barrie Bremner Re: Volunteers for a multilog patch? 50176 by: Peter van Dijk 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] -- hi, first of all: nice logo but IMHO a senseless waste of bandwith... and now for your question: what are the permissions of the ~control/ldapserver and who owns it? most troubles around seem to raise out of wrong ownership and file permissions. be so kind and have a look or post a ls -l. ;) a == Alexander Jernejcic email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] begin LOVE-LETTER-UND-NIX-DAZUGELERNT.txt.vbs I am a Signature, not a Virus! end == -Original Message- From: suresh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2000 1:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: qmail-ldap-help Hi I am trying to install ldap-qmail.Can anybody tell me what this error means (i have vreated the ldapserver file and ldap is working) Oct 7 11:44:52 sunmailjol qmail: [ID 748625 mail.alert] 970919092.654456 alert: cannot start qmail-lspawn or it had an error! Check if ~control/ldapserver exis ts. Suresh ___ Makes Internet work in Indian languages ___ hi mark, nice and complete post (with logs) ;) for me it seems, that a local progy (echo to:marc | qmail-injector) or a bounce has generated these mails since the machines name a asume peppo is the mailers hostname) is in the domains part. what is in your ~/alias/.qmail-postmaster and mailer-daemon files - something like "marc"? may be i am barking up the wrong tree, but it could be worth a check. ;) a == Alexander Jernejcic email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] begin LOVE-LETTER-UND-NIX-DAZUGELERNT.txt.vbs I am a Signature, not a Virus! end == -Original Message- From: Marc Knoop [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 11:05 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: 4 messages stuck in Q - how can I rm them? Hi folks. It seems that I have 4 message stuck in the queue, and believe it or not, the *logs* may show why! ;) Log Excerpt 2000-10-06 16:29:31.137609500 starting delivery 29: msg 642823 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2000-10-06 16:29:31.137772500 status: local 1/10 remote 0/175 2000-10-06 16:29:31.145975500 delivery 29: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 2000-10-06 16:29:31.146120500 status: local 0/10 remote 0/175 Where as a successful entry reads: 2000-10-06 15:35:23.162512500 starting delivery 22: msg 642827 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] ^^ Failing message doesn't have the domain name first. I'm not sure what generated those 4 messages, but I'd guess that it must have been another service running on the local machine (as qmail wouldn't accept a message that's not in my list, right?). Any thoughts? I'd like to read the messages (just in case it was something important), but I am fine by deleting it (unless it happens again). TIA, ../mk - w. logs! ;) hi, ... and the instructions for setting up multiple pop users under one userid. ... What you prolly need is: branaghgroup.com:alias-branaghgroup:com then the alias user will control that domain. Now you can set up the dot-qmail file ~alias/.qmail-branaghgroup:com-barney: [EMAIL PROTECTED] nope, not at all. with
spam alarm as result from help with girlfriend
hi, i think "Wheres Mybrudda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]" did gather adresses for spam-mail! just received spam from "From Lily [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]" anybody else a victim? :( a == Alexander Jernejcic email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] begin LOVE-LETTER-UND-NIX-DAZUGELERNT.txt.vbs I am a Signature, not a Virus! end ==
RE: ORBS
hi, to put in in a nutshell: put domains to receive mails for into ~/control/rcpthosts put ip-adressess for which you wish to relay into /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb don't use the relaymailfrom-patch - ORBS checks this! self-experience ;) [room for steps anyone else would add] ;) a == Alexander Jernejcic email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] begin LOVE-LETTER-UND-NIX-DAZUGELERNT.txt.vbs I am a Signature, not a Virus! end == -Original Message- From: Mark Walsh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2000 10:41 PM To: Qmail Subject: ORBS I seen a lot of discussion on the ORBS issue in the past. However, did any ever post the solution to closing the relay for spam? Make the instructions clear for this newbie will you? Mark Walsh slowly learning linux...
RE: Can't switch to queue directory.
hi, are you sure that there is qmail anserwing? redhat seems to reinstall sendmail silently... have a look to /etc/inetd.conf (line that starts with smtp) ;) a == Alexander Jernejcic email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] begin LOVE-LETTER-UND-NIX-DAZUGELERNT.txt.vbs I am a Signature, not a Virus! end == -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Barrie Bremner Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 2:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Can't switch to queue directory. Hi all. I've just upgraded to RedHat 7.0 and my qmail is dead. I'm getting the following error: [root@flux queue-fix-1.4]# telnet 192.168.0.1 25 Trying 192.168.0.1... Connected to flux.localdomain (192.168.0.1). Escape character is '^]'. alert: cannot start: unable to switch to queue directory Connection closed by foreign host. I've run queue fix, binned /var/qmail and run 'make setup check' and './fast-config flux.localdomain' again My qmail users are still OK... How do I fix this? Baz. -- Barrie J. Bremner Email: TheEnglishman at ecosse.net (PGP public key available at pgp.mit.edu) URL: http://www.geocities.com/thefatenglishman Telephone: UK 01672 811246 Mobile:UK 07968 792975 Help Micro$oft wipe out piracy - get Linux.
OK so I eat spam
OK I will admit it I eat spam for breakfast, lunch and dinner every day YES that is why my girlfriend left me Are we happy? You sure? I now have to live knowing that because of my selfish behaviour, my girlfriend of 4 years (and just last week, I actually held her hand! WOW! :) ) is now a lesbian living with her qinky mother in a monastery in north-east korea. All because I started to eat spam instead of polony (balony, whatever u call it). I hope you are happy. *Sniff* Wheres _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
multiple queues
Hello, My qmail queue (/mail/queue) got pretty huge (over 80k e-mails, 60k not yet preprocessed) after a large mailing I sent to my subscribers (around 50k e-mail addresses). At that point current e-mail activity was stalled (messages not being delivered or received), so I * shut down qmail * mved /mail/queue /mail/queue.1 * recreated /mail/queue and applied queue-fix on it * started qmail Everything seems to be running fine at this point, except for the fact that I still have queue.1 with over unsent e-mails in it :-( How can I empty /mail/queue.1 while /mail/queue continues to handle current e-mail activity? I know how to do it with sendmail or postfix, but have no idea with qmail. Thank you for your help! Regards, Simon Grabowski
Re: multiple queues
On Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 12:53:39PM +0200, Szymon Grabowski wrote: How can I empty /mail/queue.1 while /mail/queue continues to handle current e-mail activity? I know how to do it with sendmail or postfix, but have no idea with qmail. Are you sure this is what you want to do, on the same computer? I'm not even sure what the effect would be of running 2 qmail installations in parallel, who knows which qmail would run faster. This might have no effect at all, for example. Or your old messages might be processed very slowly. Oh well. The easiest way to fix this would probably be to do a second qmail install in another directory (/var/qmail2), and then move your queue.1 over there. I would advice to then run one of the several 'fix queue' scripts. Take care not to start a tcpserver for the second qmail, it just needs to send. Regards, bert hubert -- PowerDNS Versatile DNS Services Trilab The Technology People 'SYN! .. SYN|ACK! .. ACK!' - the mating call of the internet
Re: qmail list reply-to
On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 05:33:34PM -0400, Russell Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Charles McLagan writes: Now, one can trash Microsoft, or Netscape, or whoever makes the MUA, but the bottom line is, this is how they work and this is how 99% of users would use them even if there were a reply-to-recipient choice. So the question is: is there a sensible (or kludgey, hack, yet sufficient) way to cope with it today? No. Reply-to-Recipient is necessary and sufficient. And what if the sender isn't on the list?
making virtualdomains effectively locals (but allowing wildcards)
Interesting. Below reveals the fruits of my trials and tribulations getting wildcards working to make all email to any wildcard act local. I use the ".local" domain for my internal network. Since people like to rename their machines and I want all machine coming to a central place, I defined a wildcard MX record in DNS and set the following up on the single internal mail server: control/rcpthosts (wildcards are allowed) localhost local .local control/locals(wildcards are NOT allowed) localhost control/virtualdomains(wildcards are allowed) local:alias-virtualdomains .local:alias-virtualdomains ~alias/.qmail-virtualdomains-default # Hack allowing virtualdomains using wildcards to act as if they were # in locals. This is necessary because virtualdomains allows wildcards # but locals does not. Forward the email to a local user regardless of # the domain name to which it was originally sent for all virtualdomains # that use this. --GPS | forward "$DEFAULT"@localhost Pretty simple all told, although not the most efficient. Now for a few questions: 1) What happens to the foo.local domain if I have the following: control/virtualdomains local:alias-virtualdomains foo.local: .local:alias-virtualdomains It would seem that this is an exclusion. Mail to foo.local never gets through. 2) What happens if there is absolutely no colon (:) on a line in virtualdomains? It doesn't seem to do anything. 3) Do people see any flaws in the following? Wouldn't it be so nice if we could merge control/locals and control/virtualdomains? In virtualdomains, Any line without a colon would be local Any line with a colon but a blank prepend would not accept mail Any line with a colon and something in the prepend would act just as virtualdomains does right now. This could be improved further to be merged with control/rcpthosts. control/locals would now not exist control/rcpthost would now not exist control/virtualdomains would be required to exist and a default install would set it up only for localhost. qmail would not start without it existing (even if it were blank) On startup, qmail would read smtproutes and virtualdomains and would only accept mail for these domains Thanks for the insight. Glenn Strauss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: qmail list reply-to
- Original Message - From: "Bruno Wolff III" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Russell Nelson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 10:27 AM Subject: Re: qmail list reply-to On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 05:33:34PM -0400, Russell Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Charles McLagan writes: Now, one can trash Microsoft, or Netscape, or whoever makes the MUA, but the bottom line is, this is how they work and this is how 99% of users would use them even if there were a reply-to-recipient choice. So the question is: is there a sensible (or kludgey, hack, yet sufficient) way to cope with it today? No. Reply-to-Recipient is necessary and sufficient. And what if the sender isn't on the list? Closed list. No senders who aren't subscribers. List is also private, should not be going out to non-sibscribers. Let's consider the subject dead, since the replies I'm getting are ones that generally fall into the 'religious' domain and not ones that actually address the problem I'm trying to solve, which has nothing to do with public lists. I have a specific list, with specific users who use currently available MUAs, and a specific problem.
Re: qmail list reply-to
* Bruno Wolff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 05:33:34PM -0400, Russell Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No. Reply-to-Recipient is necessary and sufficient. And what if the sender isn't on the list? Then the sender should ask for a Cc: - remember kids, it isn't called Courtesy Copy for nothing. Sending a Cc: to someone obviously subscribed to a list is the exact opposite of courtesy (and a straight way into many killfiles including mine, courtesy of procmail). As I said before: if you think you need to use Outlook or similarly defective "programs" use them for what they were made for: reading mail. Not writing. -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
RE: CST17030532ID - OK so I eat spam (fwd) (fwd)
*** Begin of forwarded message *** Date: 08-Oct-00 12:05:58 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: CST17030532ID - OK so I eat spam (fwd) --- Forwarded message follows --- Hello marrandy, Thank you for writing to MSN Hotmail. We have closed the account in question because of a violation of our Terms Of Service (TOS). You can read our TOS at: http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/dasp/hminfo_shell.asp?content=tos Hotmail has comprehensive online help available to you. For more information on Hotmail features, functions, and issues, click the "Help" button on the horizontal navigation bar. We hope that this e-mail has provided you with the assistance you needed. Sincerely, Neovanni MSN Hotmail Customer Support Hello. this person is spamming the qmail mailing list. They are also, apparently, harvesting list addresses Date: 08-Oct-00 06:48:22 From: Wheres Mybrudda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OK so I eat spam --- Forwarded message follows --- OK I will admit it SNIP *** End of forwarded message *** Regards...Martin -- --- The only thing that stops God from sending another flood is that the first one was useless. -- Chamfort
