Need help... Please :)

[Goran Blazic]

A friend of mine is writing a component to access a pop3 account and read
mails, detect new ones...
More or less standard stuff :)

Now he asked me, whether I could send a few mails to him, so he can test his
parser with messages created with different mail agents...
But now the problem... I use only one mail agent, so  I am asking you: Could
you please send a (not too long) message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Thanks in advance, Goran

Re: Need help... Please :)

[Brett Randall]

> "Goran" == Goran Blazic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Goran>  so I am asking you: Could you please send a (not too long)
Goran>  message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

You know that is suicide sending that to a list of a few hundred ppl,
don't you? :P
-- 
FATAL SYSTEM ERROR: Press F13 to continue... 

mimeremove

[Asfihani]

Hi,

Ho do I remove attachment file for a mailing list?
I already add 
--
Asfihani.   #ICQ UIN: 85858803
Baichaineeyon Mein Chain

mimeremove

[Asfihani]

Hi,
Upssssorry for unfinishing message :(

How do I remove attachment file for a mailing list ?
I already add multipart/mixed in DIR/mimeremove
But the ezmlm always return message wich contains attachment to sender, 
not post it to subscribers without attachment.
I want the message posted without attachment.
--
Asfihani.   #ICQ UIN: 85858803
Baichaineeyon Mein Chain

Re: Compiling under Mandrake 7.1

[Michael Hufnagl]

hi,

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Roger Walker wrote:
> > Reading the error message closely reveals that asm/sigcontext.h  is
> > included from signal.h. asm/sigcontext.h is probably part of the kernel
> > include files. Do you have those installed?
> 
>   On both systems I have the kernel source installed (in the case of
> 7.1, I have 2.2.17, but on the 6.x system, it would be 2.2.14). As I
> indicated, that file does not appear on either system, yet it compiled on
> the earlier Mandrake system...

hmmm

here is the output of a locate on my mandrake7.1
[root@enterprise]# locate sigcontext.h
/usr/include/bits/sigcontext.h
/usr/src/linux-2.2.15/include/asm-i386/sigcontext.h
/usr/i586-glibc20-linux/include/sigcontext.h 


--

MfG
Michael Hufnagl
Netzwerktechnik

***
* ecore Kommunikations AG
* http://www.ecore.net
*

qmail Digest 23 Oct 2000 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1162

[qmail-digest-help]

qmail Digest 23 Oct 2000 10:00:00 - Issue 1162

Topics (messages 50922 through 50952):

Forwarding
50922 by: Richard Sjögårdh
50923 by: Johan Almqvist
50924 by: Richard Sjögårdh
50925 by: Johan Almqvist
50926 by: Richard Sjögårdh

SMTP Authorization
50927 by: Mark Thomas (Tech14)
50928 by: Jeremy McLeod
50940 by: Colin Humphreys
50944 by: tim.hunter.cimx.com
50946 by: Bruce Guenter

local mail system should be only locally
50929 by: Sebastian Wolfgarten
50930 by: MaD dUCK
50931 by: Alex Pennace

Re: orbs and qmail
50932 by: Kevin Waterson
50935 by: Alex Pennace
50937 by: Kevin Waterson

SSL POP3
50933 by: Vinko Vrsalovic
50936 by: Hubbard, David

Re: Flushing Queue
50934 by: Ricardo Cerqueira

Re: Local delivery in 2 SMTP hops
50938 by: Frederico Marques

pine patch 4.20
50939 by: ctpater.telocity.com

Compiling under Mandrake 7.1
50941 by: Roger Walker
50942 by: Peter van Dijk
50943 by: Roger Walker
50952 by: Michael Hufnagl

repeated received
50945 by: wheatly
50947 by: Alex Pennace

Need help... Please :)
50948 by: Goran Blazic
50949 by: Brett Randall

mimeremove
50950 by: Asfihani
50951 by: Asfihani

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,
I still tries to set up a .qmail in order to deliver one and the same 
incoming mail local _and_ to a external user. The .qmail looks like:
&[EMAIL PROTECTED]
./Maildir/
The log says:

Oct 22 15:13:06 lix qmail: 972220386.397546 info msg 201365: bytes 778 from 
qp 1698 uid 502
Oct 22 15:13:06 lix qmail: 972220386.452128 starting delivery 2793: msg 
201365 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oct 22 15:13:06 lix qmail: 972220386.452185 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
Oct 22 15:13:06 lix qmail: 972220386.456634 delivery 2793: deferral: 
Uh-oh:_.qmail_has_file_delivery_but_has_x_bit_set._(#4.7.0)/
Oct 22 15:13:06 lix qmail: 972220386.456717 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20

How do I fix this?

TIA

/Richard





On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 03:18:04PM +0200, Richard Sjögårdh wrote:
> Hi,
> Oct 22 15:13:06 lix qmail: 972220386.456634 delivery 2793: deferral: 
> Uh-oh:_.qmail_has_file_delivery_but_has_x_bit_set._(#4.7.0)/
> How do I fix this?

chmod -x .qmail is my wild guess?

-Johan
-- 
Johan Almqvist




Hi,
yes, that was one reason, but now postmaster gets a return mail:

This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. The following address(es) failed:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
unrouteable mail domain "otherdomain.com"

The log looks fine (?)

Oct 22 15:56:21 lix qmail: 97981.883461 info msg 201365: bytes 1105 
from qp 2254 uid 1065
Oct 22 15:56:21 lix qmail: 97981.943648 starting delivery 2819: msg 
201365 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oct 22 15:56:21 lix qmail: 97981.943719 status: local 1/10 remote 1/20
Oct 22 15:56:21 lix qmail: 97981.943746 delivery 2818: success: 
did_1+1+0/qp_2254/
Oct 22 15:56:21 lix qmail: 97981.943771 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20
Oct 22 15:56:21 lix qmail: 97981.943794 end msg 201364
Oct 22 15:56:22 lix qmail: 97982.055835 delivery 2819: success: 
193.12.6.233_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_OK_id=13nLaw-0003X7-00/
Oct 22 15:56:22 lix qmail: 97982.055931 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20

The mail seams delivered but the postmaster gets this:

Oct 22 15:56:22 lix qmail: 97982.055955 end msg 201365
Oct 22 15:56:22 lix qmail: 97982.284839 new msg 201364
Oct 22 15:56:22 lix qmail: 97982.284930 info msg 201364: bytes 2383 
from <> qp 2257 uid 502
Oct 22 15:56:22 lix qmail: 97982.331165 starting delivery 2820: msg 
201364 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oct 22 15:56:22 lix qmail: 97982.331236 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
Oct 22 15:56:22 lix qmail: 97982.357498 delivery 2820: success: 
did_1+0+0/ Oct 22 15:56:22 lix qmail: 97982.357578 status: local 0/10 
remote 0/20
Oct 22 15:56:22 lix qmail: 97982.357602 end msg 201364

Any ideas?

TIA

/Richard




At 15:34 2000-10-22 +0200, Johan Almqvist wrote:
>On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 03:18:04PM +0200, Richard Sjögårdh wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Oct 22 15:13:06 lix qmail: 972220386.456634 delivery 2793: deferral:
> > Uh-oh:_.qmail_has_file_delivery_but_has_x_bit_set._(#4.7.0)/
> > How do I fix this?
>
>chmod -x .qmail is my wild guess?
>
>-Johan
>--
>Johan Almqvist





On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 04:05:15PM +0200, Richard Sjögårdh wrote:
> Hi,
> yes, that was one reason, but now postmaster gets a return mail:
> This message was created

Re: SSL POP3

[Andrzej]

On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 04:59:52PM -0400, Hubbard, David wrote:
> You can use stunnel to encapsulate qmail-pop3d withing SSL.

[...]

stunnel and other SSL wrappers work great, but then qmail sees all
connections incoming from localhost. It's not possible to use the "POP3
before SMTP" relay controls any more.

In some cases SMTP AUTH is helpful, but not all SMTP clients can do AUTH.

Or is there any way to use an SSL wrapper and still know which IP can
realy?

Andrzej

Re: SSL POP3

[Frank Tegtmeyer]

> Or is there any way to use an SSL wrapper and still know which IP can
> realy?

I think it's possible with tcpserver/stunnel. But I never tried it.

Regards, Frank

What should i modify to run more than 256 qmail processes ?

[Nicolas Deslions]

Hi,

I want to run a "big" smtp server... with nearly 400 processes running
Some ppl told me that i would have to modify "files handles" or "max
processes".
Anyone can tell me more about that ?

Thx


Nicolas Deslions
System, network and security admin

Net2one.com, France
20 rue du Sentier 75002 Paris
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.net2one.com

Re: What should i modify to run more than 256 qmail processes ?

[Vinko Vrsalovic]

> 
> Hi,
> 
> I want to run a "big" smtp server... with nearly 400 processes running
> Some ppl told me that i would have to modify "files handles" or "max
> processes".
> Anyone can tell me more about that ?

yes, http://www.qmail.org/top.html#large can tell you about it.

HTH,
-- 
Vinko Vrsalovic B.   +
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   ++  Perche' la tua lingua e mia!, MIA! ++
ICQ: 9299103 ++  (Mr B.)++
Geek code will never +
be available... :-)  [Today's mode:  PSB (Power Saving Brain)] 

Re: What should i modify to run more than 256 qmail processes ?

[markd]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 09:08:38AM -0300, Vinko Vrsalovic wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I want to run a "big" smtp server... with nearly 400 processes running
> > Some ppl told me that i would have to modify "files handles" or "max
> > processes".
> > Anyone can tell me more about that ?
> 
> yes, http://www.qmail.org/top.html#large can tell you about it.

But first you want to make sure you need to do this. By the sounds you
are relatively new to qmail. What makes you think that you need "400
processes"? Second: you didn't say which processes you want 400 of?


Regards.

Re: Compiling under Mandrake 7.1

[Peter Green]

also sprach micha:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Roger Walker wrote:
> > > Reading the error message closely reveals that asm/sigcontext.h  is
> > > included from signal.h. asm/sigcontext.h is probably part of the kernel
> > > include files. Do you have those installed?
> > 
> > On both systems I have the kernel source installed (in the case of

That really isn't what he asked. He asked about the kernel *include* files,
aka kernel-headers-*.rpm. Do this:

  rpm -qa|grep kernel> kernel-rpms

on both a machine that ``works'' and one that doesn't, and diff(1) the
files.

> hmmm
> 
> here is the output of a locate on my mandrake7.1
> [root@enterprise]# locate sigcontext.h
> /usr/include/bits/sigcontext.h
> /usr/src/linux-2.2.15/include/asm-i386/sigcontext.h
> /usr/i586-glibc20-linux/include/sigcontext.h 

On RedHat (but you get the idea...):

  (pcg@micah) ~> locate sigcontext.h
  /usr/include/asm/sigcontext.h
  /usr/include/bits/sigcontext.h
  [...]

  (pcg@micah) ~> rpm -qf /usr/include/asm/sigcontext.h
  kernel-headers-2.4.0-0.21

My guess is that's what you're looking for. Even if you already have it
installed, install it again (with --force if you have to) to recreate the
necessary symlinks.

/pg
-- 
Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
It won't be covered in the book. The source code has to be useful for
something, after all... :-)
--- Larry Wall in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

SMTP Issues

[Rob Hines Jr.]

I emailed a little while back asking for some help on sending out large
batches of mail. I have since then, completely rebuilt my mail server,
implementing the big todo patch, and large mail fixes as well as  Krzysztof
Dabrowski's SMTP_AUTH patch.

I run everything through supervise using the scripts from the qmail site, and
other than the aformentioned modifications, nothing has been changed.

I am on a Sun Ultra Enterprise 2 with dual 200 processors and 1.2G of main
memory, qpopper works great, and there are few problems with users in the
office. The critical problem is that NO ONE can connect to SMTP from dialup.
They uniformly get messages saying that the server was not responding.

I tried telnetting to port 25 and waited the better part of 30 seconds before
I got an SMTP prompt. If this is happening to my remote users, then this is
the reason for the no response errors. I would appreciate any suggestions on
how I could fix this.

BTW, I /have/ to use smtp_auth because of the nature of my user base.

Please let me know.

--
Rob Hines Jr.

Re: SMTP Issues

[markd]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 09:41:43AM -0500, Rob Hines Jr. wrote:
 
> I tried telnetting to port 25 and waited the better part of 30 seconds before
> I got an SMTP prompt. If this is happening to my remote users, then this is
> the reason for the no response errors. I would appreciate any suggestions on
> how I could fix this.

This question has been asked many, many times.

What are you running qmail-smtpd with? inetd, tcpserver, xinetd?

Assuming tcpserver, what options are you using?


Regards.

Re: SMTP Issues

[Charles Cazabon]

Rob Hines Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> I am on a Sun Ultra Enterprise 2 with dual 200 processors and 1.2G of main
> memory, qpopper works great, and there are few problems with users in the
> office. The critical problem is that NO ONE can connect to SMTP from dialup.
> They uniformly get messages saying that the server was not responding.
> 
> I tried telnetting to port 25 and waited the better part of 30 seconds before
> I got an SMTP prompt.

Read the man page for tcpserver, and observe especially the bits about the
-H and -R options.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
---

Re: SMTP Issues

[Petr Novotny]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 23 Oct 2000, at 9:41, Rob Hines Jr. wrote:

> I tried telnetting to port 25 and waited the better part of 30 seconds
> before I got an SMTP prompt. If this is happening to my remote users,
> then this is the reason for the no response errors. I would appreciate
> any suggestions on how I could fix this.

If it's close to 26 seconds, it looks like ident lookups time out. Try 
to add -R option to tcpserver.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5.2 -- QDPGP 2.61a
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html

iQA/AwUBOfRCiVMwP8g7qbw/EQJVewCgphrhpzaPSAA08egLXi4IgjUXhuIAoJw3
WKr7HwFZG+XYE1ECUfV3VRr8
=3eUm
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.antek.cz
PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F
-- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk.
 [Tom Waits]

Alias - for mailing lists

[ROD]

I'm trying to set up aliases for mailings lists 
e.g.
 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] to goto [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] to goto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
All mailing lists are created under one user ezmlm 
so both the addressess need to be directed by domain name to 
the correct list.
 
Any help would be appreciated
 
Best regards
 
Rod 

Re: SMTP Issues

[Rob Hines Jr.]

Ugh, sorry:

[9:56am] rhines@mail:/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd> more run
#!/bin/sh
QMAILDUID=`/usr/xpg4/bin/id -u qmaild`
NOFILESGID=`/usr/xpg4/bin/id -g qmaild`
MAXSMTPD=`cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming`
exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 400 \
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -p -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c "$MAXSMTPD" \
-u "$QMAILDUID" -g "$NOFILESGID" 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd /bin
/checkpassword /bin/true 2>&1
[9:56am] rhines@mail:/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd>

My concurrencyincoming value is set to 50.

Rob

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 09:41:43AM -0500, Rob Hines Jr. wrote:
>
> > I tried telnetting to port 25 and waited the better part of 30 seconds before
> > I got an SMTP prompt. If this is happening to my remote users, then this is
> > the reason for the no response errors. I would appreciate any suggestions on
> > how I could fix this.
>
> This question has been asked many, many times.
>
> What are you running qmail-smtpd with? inetd, tcpserver, xinetd?
>
> Assuming tcpserver, what options are you using?
>
> Regards.

--
Rob Hines Jr.
System Administrator

Phone:  (317)469-4535
Fax:  (317)469-4508
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
URL: http://www.joboptions.com

RE: What should i modify to run more than 256 qmail processes ?

[Nicolas Deslions]

ok so i give you more infos :
i want to launch a lot of qmail-remote processes , we handle a lot of
outgoing mails here, atm around 150.000/day but it will be more very soon.
I want to send all those mails within 2 hours.

I already looked at  http://www.qmail.org/top.html#large but i don't find it
really easy to read and it's not speaking about the kern.maxfiles etc...


-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Envoyé : Monday, October 23, 2000 14:24
À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Objet : Re: What should i modify to run more than 256 qmail processes ?


On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 09:08:38AM -0300, Vinko Vrsalovic wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I want to run a "big" smtp server... with nearly 400 processes running
> > Some ppl told me that i would have to modify "files handles" or "max
> > processes".
> > Anyone can tell me more about that ?
>
> yes, http://www.qmail.org/top.html#large can tell you about it.

But first you want to make sure you need to do this. By the sounds you
are relatively new to qmail. What makes you think that you need "400
processes"? Second: you didn't say which processes you want 400 of?


Regards.

Re: SSL POP3

[Bruce Guenter]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 01:59:20PM +0200, Andrzej wrote:
> stunnel and other SSL wrappers work great, but then qmail sees all
> connections incoming from localhost. It's not possible to use the "POP3
> before SMTP" relay controls any more.

Nope.  With both stunnel and sslwrap you can (and should) run the target
program directly from the wrapper program.

The sslwrap documentation states:
Instead of doing a loopback IP connection as described above,
you can use the -exec option to directly execute a program. For
security reasons, I recommend using the standard inetd
configuration specified above, instead.
I queried the author about why he felt that doing loopback IP
connections was more secure than just exec'ing the program directly, and
received no response.  I know of no reason it would be more secure, and
it prevents you from doing things like relay-ctrl as well.
-- 
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   http://em.ca/~bruceg/

 PGP signature

Re: What should i modify to run more than 256 qmail processes ?

[Sean Reifschneider]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 05:03:21PM +0200, Nicolas Deslions wrote:
>i want to launch a lot of qmail-remote processes , we handle a lot of
>outgoing mails here, atm around 150.000/day but it will be more very soon.
>I want to send all those mails within 2 hours.

Are these unique messages, or are you using a boatload of recipients on
a single message?  In the former case, you'll be pushing it to get 75,000
individual messages injected into the queue per hour on a single machine.
That's about the max I'd expect you to be able to process without going
to multiple machines though.

Sean
-- 
 Tools may limit the user, but the utility of tools is limited by the
 skill of the user.  -- Leonard Compagno
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python

RE: What should i modify to run more than 256 qmail processes ?

[Nicolas Deslions]

yup unique messages.


-Message d'origine-
De : Sean Reifschneider [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Envoyé : Monday, October 23, 2000 17:40
À : Nicolas Deslions
Cc : [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Objet : Re: What should i modify to run more than 256 qmail processes ?


On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 05:03:21PM +0200, Nicolas Deslions wrote:
>i want to launch a lot of qmail-remote processes , we handle a lot of
>outgoing mails here, atm around 150.000/day but it will be more very soon.
>I want to send all those mails within 2 hours.

Are these unique messages, or are you using a boatload of recipients on
a single message?  In the former case, you'll be pushing it to get 75,000
individual messages injected into the queue per hour on a single machine.
That's about the max I'd expect you to be able to process without going
to multiple machines though.

Sean
--
 Tools may limit the user, but the utility of tools is limited by the
 skill of the user.  -- Leonard Compagno
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python

Re: Compiling under Mandrake 7.1

[Roger Walker]

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Michael Hufnagl wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Roger Walker wrote:
> > > Reading the error message closely reveals that asm/sigcontext.h  is
> > > included from signal.h. asm/sigcontext.h is probably part of the kernel
> > > include files. Do you have those installed?
> > 
> > On both systems I have the kernel source installed (in the case of
> > 7.1, I have 2.2.17, but on the 6.x system, it would be 2.2.14). As I
> > indicated, that file does not appear on either system, yet it compiled on
> > the earlier Mandrake system...
> 
> hmmm
> 
> here is the output of a locate on my mandrake7.1
> [root@enterprise]# locate sigcontext.h
> /usr/include/bits/sigcontext.h
> /usr/src/linux-2.2.15/include/asm-i386/sigcontext.h
> /usr/i586-glibc20-linux/include/sigcontext.h 

I should have been more specific :-/

The following exist on both systems. "/usr/src/linux" is a
symbolic link, in each case, to the appropriate kernel source tree.

/usr/src/linux/include/asm-i386/sigcontext.h
/usr/src/linux/include/asm -> asm-i386/
/usr/include/asm -> ../src/linux/include/asm/

So, regarding "sig_alarm.c" and "sigcontext.h", both systems are
set up identically. Both systems are using qmail 1.03. The Mandrake 7.1
system gives me this error on compile:

./compile sig_alarm.c In file included from /usr/include/signal.h:300,
 from sig_alarm.c:1: /usr/include/bits/sigcontext.h:28:
asm/sigcontext.h: No such file or directory
make: *** [sig_alarm.o] Error 1

Here's my suspicion: Mandrake tends to "customize" lots of things,
including the kernel source and even, I've heard, the ext2 filesystem. I
am actually using the stock 7.1 kernel. I'll compile a new one from the
2.2.17 virgin source tree and see if that makes a difference.

I know that the file does exist at the correct path, in the same
way on both systems. For whatever reason, it appears that on the 7.1
system, the multiple links are not being followed to the end.

-- 
Roger Walker 
Voice/Fax 1-780-440-2685 
"HIS Pain; YOUR Gain"

Re: Compiling under Mandrake 7.1

[Roger Walker]

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Peter Green wrote:

>   (pcg@micah) ~> rpm -qf /usr/include/asm/sigcontext.h
>   kernel-headers-2.4.0-0.21
> 
> My guess is that's what you're looking for. Even if you already have it
> installed, install it again (with --force if you have to) to recreate the
> necessary symlinks.

Looks like I spoke too soon. In my previous message (after yours
but before I responded to this one) I outlined all of the linked
directories on both systems. I thought I was thorough, but I was not :-(
The rpm command above indicated that the file was missing, so I traced
through each link. I found that in the /usr/src/linux/include directory,
the "asm" link to "asm-i386" was actually missing.

After adding the link (not sure why it was missing), qmail
compiles (make setup check) properly. Thanks, all, for helping me through
this.

-- 
Roger Walker 
Voice/Fax 1-780-440-2685 
"HIS Pain; YOUR Gain"

Why is an alias not working?

[Jennifer Franklin]

I have set up Postgres on our server and under /var/qmail/alias i placed a
.qmail-postgres (the user account for postgreSQL is postgres), I then
forward all mail to postgres to root

.qmail-postgres contains
&root

all root mail is aliased to our two system administrators.

When I checked the alias by sending mail to postgres and checked 
/var/mail/mail.log I see the following entry:

Oct 23 13:19:09 tuwanda qmail: 972321549.021134 status: local 0/10 remote
0/20 
Oct 23 13:21:42 tuwanda qmail: 972321702.016694 starting delivery
1084: msg 231 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Oct 23
13:21:42 tuwanda qmail: 972321702.016776 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
Oct 23 13:21:42 tuwanda qmail: 972321702.021020 delivery
1084: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 

If I have aliased the postgres account why is it trying to change to the
postgres maildir (there is none since I don't want mail being delivered to
the postgres account.

If anyone could help me on this I would really appreciate it.
Please email me directly since I am not subscribed to the qmail mailing
list the volume of mail received is just too high for me.

Thanks very much,
Jen

__
Jennifer Franklin (819) 953-4028
Assistant Application Designer
Labour Operations Applications Development
Human Resources Development Canada

Re: Why is an alias not working?

[Vince Vielhaber]

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Jennifer Franklin wrote:

> I have set up Postgres on our server and under /var/qmail/alias i placed a
> .qmail-postgres (the user account for postgreSQL is postgres), I then
> forward all mail to postgres to root
> 
> .qmail-postgres contains
> &root
> 
> all root mail is aliased to our two system administrators.
> 
> When I checked the alias by sending mail to postgres and checked 
> /var/mail/mail.log I see the following entry:
> 
> Oct 23 13:19:09 tuwanda qmail: 972321549.021134 status: local 0/10 remote
> 0/20 
> Oct 23 13:21:42 tuwanda qmail: 972321702.016694 starting delivery
> 1084: msg 231 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Oct 23
> 13:21:42 tuwanda qmail: 972321702.016776 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
> Oct 23 13:21:42 tuwanda qmail: 972321702.021020 delivery
> 1084: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ 
> 
> If I have aliased the postgres account why is it trying to change to the
> postgres maildir (there is none since I don't want mail being delivered to
> the postgres account.
> 
> If anyone could help me on this I would really appreciate it.
> Please email me directly since I am not subscribed to the qmail mailing
> list the volume of mail received is just too high for me.

The user postgres is a real user.  Move ~alias/.qmail-postgres to ~postgres

Vince.
-- 
==
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSHemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.pop4.net
 128K ISDN from $22.00/mo - 56K Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directoryhttp://www.camping-usa.com
   Online Giftshop Superstorehttp://www.cloudninegifts.com
==

Re: Why is an alias not working?

[Dave Sill]

Jennifer Franklin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I have set up Postgres on our server and under /var/qmail/alias i placed a
>.qmail-postgres (the user account for postgreSQL is postgres), I then
>forward all mail to postgres to root
>
>.qmail-postgres contains
>&root
>
>all root mail is aliased to our two system administrators.

Users override aliases. Try moving ~alias/.qmail-postgres to
~postgres/.qmail. Or use qmail-users to override the user.

-Dave

Re: SMTP Issues

[Vinko Vrsalovic]

> 
> Ugh, sorry:
> 
> [9:56am] rhines@mail:/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd> more run
> #!/bin/sh
> QMAILDUID=`/usr/xpg4/bin/id -u qmaild`
> NOFILESGID=`/usr/xpg4/bin/id -g qmaild`
> MAXSMTPD=`cat /var/qmail/control/concurrencyincoming`
> exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 400 \
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -p -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c "$MAXSMTPD" \
> -u "$QMAILDUID" -g "$NOFILESGID" 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd /bin
> /checkpassword /bin/true 2>&1
> [9:56am] rhines@mail:/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-smtpd>
> 
> My concurrencyincoming value is set to 50.
> 
> Rob
> 

adding -l 0 to the commmand options for tcpserver worked for me



-- 
Vinko Vrsalovic B.   +
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   ++  Perche' la tua lingua e mia!, MIA! ++
ICQ: 9299103 ++  (Mr B.)++
Geek code will never +
be available... :-)  [Today's mode:  PSB (Power Saving Brain)] 

Re: system v style init script for svscan

[Chin Fang]

> > "Have you looked at LWQ?" its practically a FAQ.
> 
> Please excuse my ignorance, but: what is LWQ?
> 
> Linux World headQuarter? ;-)

Nope.  He most likely meant Dave Sill's "life with qmail".

Regards,

Chin Fang
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> Felix
> 

Maildir-Aware /bin/mail Replacement?

[Kai MacTane]

Hello. Does anyone know of a Maildir-aware replacement for /bin/mail, or a 
patch that will give it Maildir awareness? I've looked at qail, but that 
seems to be a simple shell script that runs maildir2mbox on the user's 
Maildir and then runs /bin/mail (and then doesn't put messages back into 
Maildir format!). This is an unacceptably clunky solution, and one that 
really isn't a total solution anyway, considering the problem.

The problem, really, is that I'd like to allow users to check their mail on 
the command line (after ssh-ing in) and/or by POP3. Unfortunately, users 
familiar with the command line have a tendency to log in and type "mail" to 
see if they have any mail. And a non-Maildir-aware /bin/mail then claims 
they have none, ignoring the dozens of files in ~/Maildir/new.

I have looked on the Qmail site for any such thing, and found nothing. Are 
there no Maildir patches or replacements for /bin/mail? It seems that such 
a common utility *should* have a Maildir-capable version. (I cannot write 
it myself, as I have just barely enough knowledge of C to write a 'Hello, 
World!" program.)

 --Kai MacTane
--
"Playing dead and sweet submission,
  Cracks the whip deadpan on cue."
 --Siouxsie and the
   Banshees,
  "Peek-a-boo"

[off-topic] Announcement: minit mailing list created

[Felix von Leitner]

I created a mailing list for discussions about my planned init system,
minit (the name is not final yet.  Maybe someone comes up with a better
one?).

So, if you were waiting for a place to voice your wishes for a small yet
feature-complete init system, please send an empty email to

  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

(yes, it's managed by ezmlm).

I will create a web page about the project at http://www.fefe.de/minit/
soon.

Please don't follow-up to this email.  Thanks.

Felix

Re: system v style init script for svscan

[Dave Sill]

Chin Fang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> > "Have you looked at LWQ?" its practically a FAQ.
>> 
>> Please excuse my ignorance, but: what is LWQ?
>> 
>> Linux World headQuarter? ;-)
>
>Nope.  He most likely meant Dave Sill's "life with qmail".

Check this out:

http://www.acronymfinder.com/af-query.asp?Acronym=lwq&Find=Find&String=exact

-Dave

RE: local mail system should be only locally

[Alexander Jernejcic]

hi,
this seems is easy if the users are not on the box itself:
put your domain in rcpthosts and do NOT set up tcp.smtp .
your qmail box will deny any attempt to relay - 
which means in fact not to send mail to other MTA's

;) 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: Sebastian Wolfgarten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2000 10:31 PM
> To: qmail liste
> Subject: local mail system should be only locally
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have got a working mail system here with some
> local users which is used to send mail between
> the users in an intranet. It works pretty fine,
> but now I have got a question: I don't want the
> local users to be able to send to any other host
> than this one here (intranet.mynetwork.com).
> How can I do this?
> 
> Bye
> Sebastian
> 
> 

Re: Maildir-Aware /bin/mail Replacement?

[Charles Cazabon]

Kai MacTane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem, really, is that I'd like to allow users to check their mail on 
> the command line (after ssh-ing in) and/or by POP3. Unfortunately, users 
> familiar with the command line have a tendency to log in and type "mail" to 
> see if they have any mail. And a non-Maildir-aware /bin/mail then claims 
> they have none, ignoring the dozens of files in ~/Maildir/new.

Make bin/mail a script something like:

#!/bin/bash

mutt -z -f ~/Maildir/

See www.mutt.org for mutt.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
---

Re: Maildir-Aware /bin/mail Replacement?

[Kai MacTane]

At 10/23/00 12:33 PM , Charles Cazabon wrote:

>Make bin/mail a script something like:
>
> #!/bin/bash
> mutt -z -f ~/Maildir/
>
>See www.mutt.org for mutt.

Looked at the mutt documentation, and I already have mutt on my system, so 
this isn't hard. Looks like a good idea. But when I try it on a user that 
has no mail, mutt starts anyway (and shows "[Msgs:0]" in the status bar). 
This is apparently not the behavior that should occur, given the docs on 
the -z switch.

Any idea what's going on there?

 --Kai MacTane
--
"I think that somehow/Somewhere inside of us,
  We must be similar/If not the same."
 --Suzanne Vega,
  "Left of Center"

Re: Maildir-Aware /bin/mail Replacement?

[Charles Cazabon]

Kai MacTane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Looked at the mutt documentation, and I already have mutt on my system, so 
> this isn't hard. Looks like a good idea. But when I try it on a user that 
> has no mail, mutt starts anyway (and shows "[Msgs:0]" in the status bar). 
> This is apparently not the behavior that should occur, given the docs on 
> the -z switch.
> 
> Any idea what's going on there?

Not really; it could be a mutt bug, as mutt evolves at a rapid pace.  You 
could try using mutt -Z instead of what I suggested earlier.

Charles
-- 
---
Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at:  http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
---

Re: Maildir-Aware /bin/mail Replacement?

[Todd Underwood]

kai,

why not just use procmail?  many people use procmail as a sendmail local
delivery agent anyway (security be damned!  you're running sendmail anyway
so how much could you possibly care?).  procmail talks native maildirs for
some time now.

Todd Underwood
Chief Technology Officer
Oso Grande Technologies, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Kai MacTane wrote:

> Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:19:53 -0700
> From: Kai MacTane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Maildir-Aware /bin/mail Replacement?
> 
> Hello. Does anyone know of a Maildir-aware replacement for /bin/mail, or a 
> patch that will give it Maildir awareness? I've looked at qail, but that 
> seems to be a simple shell script that runs maildir2mbox on the user's 
> Maildir and then runs /bin/mail (and then doesn't put messages back into 
> Maildir format!). This is an unacceptably clunky solution, and one that 
> really isn't a total solution anyway, considering the problem.
> 
> The problem, really, is that I'd like to allow users to check their mail on 
> the command line (after ssh-ing in) and/or by POP3. Unfortunately, users 
> familiar with the command line have a tendency to log in and type "mail" to 
> see if they have any mail. And a non-Maildir-aware /bin/mail then claims 
> they have none, ignoring the dozens of files in ~/Maildir/new.
> 
> I have looked on the Qmail site for any such thing, and found nothing. Are 
> there no Maildir patches or replacements for /bin/mail? It seems that such 
> a common utility *should* have a Maildir-capable version. (I cannot write 
> it myself, as I have just barely enough knowledge of C to write a 'Hello, 
> World!" program.)
> 
>  --Kai MacTane
> --
> "Playing dead and sweet submission,
>   Cracks the whip deadpan on cue."
>  --Siouxsie and the
>Banshees,
>   "Peek-a-boo"
> 
> 

maildrop filtering

[Brice Ruth]

Greetings.

Just wondering if this is how its supposed to work (couldn't find enough
docs on it...):

Setup: using qmail & vpopmail, compiled maildrop to use uid: vpopmail,
gid: vchkpw

Went into /var/vpopmail/domains/// and did

chmod +t `pwd`

then created .qmail file with contents:

| /usr/local/bin/maildrop ./.mailfilter

created .mailfilter in same directory with contents:

if (!( /^From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ) || ( /^From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ))
to ./Maildir/

chmod vpopmail:vchkpw .qmail .mailfilter

Yes? No? Totally off kilter??  Lemme know, please ... 

Regards,
Brice Ruth

Re: Maildir-Aware /bin/mail Replacement?

[Kai MacTane]

At 10/23/00 12:59 PM , Todd Underwood wrote:

>why not just use procmail?  many people use procmail as a sendmail local
>delivery agent anyway (security be damned!  you're running sendmail anyway
>so how much could you possibly care?).  procmail talks native maildirs for
>some time now.

Not very familiar with it (on a user or admin basis; I've certainly heard 
of it). Your mention of "security be damned!  you're running sendmail anyway
so how much could you possibly care?" doesn't do wonders for my state of 
mind, though! I can see how it wouldn't be a problem for those running 
sendmail, but I'm running qmail, and would rather not blow a massive hole 
in my security.

What are the security problems with it? And will using it allow my shell 
users to type "mail" and either get a "no new mail" message or show them 
the contents of their mailbox if they do have something?

 --Kai MacTane
--
"This trembling, adored,
  Tousled bird mad girl..."
 --The Cure,
  "Burn"

Re: SSL POP3

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Andrzej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 23 October 2000 at 13:59:20 +0200
 > On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 04:59:52PM -0400, Hubbard, David wrote:
 > > You can use stunnel to encapsulate qmail-pop3d withing SSL.
 > 
 > [...]
 > 
 > stunnel and other SSL wrappers work great, but then qmail sees all
 > connections incoming from localhost. It's not possible to use the "POP3
 > before SMTP" relay controls any more.

Am I missing something here, or will allowing relaying from localhost
solve the problem?  Assuming you want to allow relaying for anybody
allowed to establish an ssl connect to do pop, anyway.
-- 
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ 
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/

Re: SSL POP3

[Adam McKenna]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 04:58:05PM -0500, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> Andrzej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 23 October 2000 at 13:59:20 +0200
>  > On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 04:59:52PM -0400, Hubbard, David wrote:
>  > > You can use stunnel to encapsulate qmail-pop3d withing SSL.
>  > 
>  > [...]
>  > 
>  > stunnel and other SSL wrappers work great, but then qmail sees all
>  > connections incoming from localhost. It's not possible to use the "POP3
>  > before SMTP" relay controls any more.
> 
> Am I missing something here, or will allowing relaying from localhost
> solve the problem?  Assuming you want to allow relaying for anybody
> allowed to establish an ssl connect to do pop, anyway.

The problem is that when using SSL-SMTP, every connection looks like its
coming from localhost, so your relay control is gone.

The best you can do is control who you want connecting to the SSL port.

I think that the reason the author recommends running thru ined (I use
tcpserver myself) is that he doesn't consider the program secure enough to
run as root.

--Adam

-- 
Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "No matter how much it changes, 
http://flounder.net/publickey.html   |  technology's just a bunch of wires 
GPG: 17A4 11F7 5E7E C2E7 08AA|  connected to a bunch of other wires."
 38B0 05D0 8BF7 2C6D 110A|  Joe Rogan, _NewsRadio_
  6:17pm  up 135 days, 15:33, 10 users,  load average: 0.04, 0.02, 0.00

RE: RBL

[Dave Gresham]

Not sure about anyone else, however this is about the 30th time I have
received
this message.

dave


-Original Message-
From: Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 8:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: RBL


Mike Jimenez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>First I did this setup and it did not work .
>tcpserver -p -v -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u1007 -g1007 0 25 \
>rblsmtpd qmail-smtpd 2>&1 | setuser qmaill accustamp | \
>setuser qmaill cyclog \
>-s100 -n5 /var/log/qmail/qmail-smtpd
>
>[root@black(/var/log)]: smstart
>[x] starting: qmail-pop3, /etc/rc.d/init.d/sendmail: setuser: command
>not found
>/etc/rc.d/init.d/sendmail: setuser: command not found

accustamp, setuser, and cyclog are from an older version of
daemontools. You should read the documentation for the current version 
of daemontools[1] and convert your script to the new commands
setuidgid and multilog. LWQ's example[2] might help.

-Dave

Footnotes: 
[1]  http://cr.yp.to/daemontools.html

[2]  http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#rblsmtpd

Re: What should i modify to run more than 256 qmail processes ?

[Sean Reifschneider]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 05:42:59PM +0200, Nicolas Deslions wrote:
>yup unique messages.

The most unique messages I've been able to deal with on a single machine
has been between 75,000 and 90,000 per hour.  At the minimum you'll
probably want the big-todo patches and inject a bunch of messages, then
pause waiting for them to be processed.  If you grow much,
expect to have to throw more hardware at the problem, or expect it to
take more than 2 hours.

Sean
-- 
 On seeing a girl with a pierced tongue, he thought, "Just like
 Microsoft.  Can't do the job right, so throw hardware at it."
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python

Re: SSL POP3

[Chris Johnson]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 09:06:35AM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 01:59:20PM +0200, Andrzej wrote:
> > stunnel and other SSL wrappers work great, but then qmail sees all
> > connections incoming from localhost. It's not possible to use the "POP3
> > before SMTP" relay controls any more.
> 
> Nope.  With both stunnel and sslwrap you can (and should) run the target
> program directly from the wrapper program.
> 
> The sslwrap documentation states:
>   Instead of doing a loopback IP connection as described above,
>   you can use the -exec option to directly execute a program. For
>   security reasons, I recommend using the standard inetd
>   configuration specified above, instead.
> I queried the author about why he felt that doing loopback IP
> connections was more secure than just exec'ing the program directly, and
> received no response.  I know of no reason it would be more secure, and
> it prevents you from doing things like relay-ctrl as well.

If you ran qmail-popup directly from sslwrap, you'd have to run sslwrap as
root. I do the loopback connection thing and I can run sslwrap as the user
"sslwrap," which has regular user permissions.

Chris

qmail-smtpd startup command

[Aaron Newcomb]

Here is my startup command for qmail-smtpd.

/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -p -v \
-u 502 -g 501 0 smtp rblsmtpd rblsmtpd -b -rrelays.msci.memphis.edu \
recordio /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \
2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &

It works great from the command line, but when I put it inside a script that
gets run at boot up like rc.local I get weird responses from it in my syslog
like . . .

>Oct 10 18:28:03 linux1 smtpd: 971216883.913493 tcpserver: status: 1/40
>Oct 10 18:28:03 linux1 smtpd: 971216883.915419 tcpserver: pid 767 from
211.39.130.218
>Oct 10 18:28:06 linux1 smtpd: 971216886.047055 tcpserver: ok 767
ns1.newcombnet.com:216.68.217.202:25 :211.39.130.218:root:24385
>Oct 10 18:28:06 linux1 smtpd: 971216886.048430 tcpserver: warning: dropping
connection, unable to run recordio: file does not exist
>Oct 10 18:28:06 linux1 smtpd: 971216886.049547 tcpserver: end 767 status
28416
>Oct 10 18:28:06 linux1 smtpd: 971216886.050495 tcpserver: status: 0/40

Any suggestions on how to get my startup command to run correctly on boot
up??

Thanks,
Aaron Newcomb
http://www.newcombnet.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: qmail-smtpd startup command

[Chris Johnson]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 09:39:58PM -0400, Aaron Newcomb wrote:
> Here is my startup command for qmail-smtpd.
> 
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -p -v \
> -u 502 -g 501 0 smtp rblsmtpd rblsmtpd -b -rrelays.msci.memphis.edu \
> recordio /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \
> 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
> 
> It works great from the command line, but when I put it inside a script that
> gets run at boot up like rc.local I get weird responses from it in my syslog
> like . . .
> 
> >Oct 10 18:28:03 linux1 smtpd: 971216883.913493 tcpserver: status: 1/40
> >Oct 10 18:28:03 linux1 smtpd: 971216883.915419 tcpserver: pid 767 from
> 211.39.130.218
> >Oct 10 18:28:06 linux1 smtpd: 971216886.047055 tcpserver: ok 767
> ns1.newcombnet.com:216.68.217.202:25 :211.39.130.218:root:24385
> >Oct 10 18:28:06 linux1 smtpd: 971216886.048430 tcpserver: warning: dropping
> connection, unable to run recordio: file does not exist

/usr/local/bin isn't in your path when the script is run at startup. Either
make sure it is in your path, or specify the full path to recordio in your
script.

Chris

RE: qmail-smtpd startup command

[Aaron Newcomb]

How do I make sure it is in my path? I am assuming this could affect
rblsmtpd as well.

Aaron

-Original Message-
From: Chris Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 10:03 PM
To: Aaron Newcomb
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: qmail-smtpd startup command


On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 09:39:58PM -0400, Aaron Newcomb wrote:
> Here is my startup command for qmail-smtpd.
>
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -p -v \
> -u 502 -g 501 0 smtp rblsmtpd rblsmtpd -b -rrelays.msci.memphis.edu \
> recordio /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \
> 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
>
> It works great from the command line, but when I put it inside a script
that
> gets run at boot up like rc.local I get weird responses from it in my
syslog
> like . . .
>
> >Oct 10 18:28:03 linux1 smtpd: 971216883.913493 tcpserver: status: 1/40
> >Oct 10 18:28:03 linux1 smtpd: 971216883.915419 tcpserver: pid 767 from
> 211.39.130.218
> >Oct 10 18:28:06 linux1 smtpd: 971216886.047055 tcpserver: ok 767
> ns1.newcombnet.com:216.68.217.202:25 :211.39.130.218:root:24385
> >Oct 10 18:28:06 linux1 smtpd: 971216886.048430 tcpserver: warning:
dropping
> connection, unable to run recordio: file does not exist

/usr/local/bin isn't in your path when the script is run at startup. Either
make sure it is in your path, or specify the full path to recordio in your
script.

Chris

How to ignore .qmail-* files for given users?

[John Chronakis]

Hello,

I would like to prevent users with ftp access to change the
delivery instructions for qmail.

To be more specific, I want some users not to be able to receive mail at all
(they all bellong to the same group) and others not be able to change
delivery instruction by creating their own dot-qmail files via ftp
(they all belong to another group).

I suppose that this is controled by QMAILHOME/users/assign,
but the man page is not very helpful.

Can anyone help?

John

RE: How to ignore .qmail-* files for given users?

[Austad, Jay]

If you're using wu-ftpd or some derivative of, you should be able to do this
in the /etc/ftpaccess file.  Do a 'man ftpaccess' for the correct syntax.

Jay

-Original Message-
From: John Chronakis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 9:55 PM
To: qmail-list
Subject: How to ignore .qmail-* files for given users?


Hello,

I would like to prevent users with ftp access to change the
delivery instructions for qmail.

To be more specific, I want some users not to be able to receive mail at all
(they all bellong to the same group) and others not be able to change
delivery instruction by creating their own dot-qmail files via ftp
(they all belong to another group).

I suppose that this is controled by QMAILHOME/users/assign,
but the man page is not very helpful.

Can anyone help?

John

any comment on this line

[Yamin Prabudy]

My friend forwad it to me from http://www.orbs.org/otherresource.html

a.. Qmail admins: Qmail's current version is insecure by default. Most
admins know enough to follow the instructions for securing it before putting
qmail into service, however it usually drops ORBS test messages checking for
UUCP pathing vulnerabilities - "! pathing" - into the admin mailbox. As ! is
a standard network addressing indicator, this can only be charitably
described as yet another Qmail bug. Qmail is extremely network unfriendly
and has been known to cause effective denial of service attacks on other
mailservers in its enthusiasm to deliver as many messages as possible in a
short period of time. For this reason it is best reserved for mailing list
server purposes only.

---

I need to know the real stuff cause I'm going to build and email server
using qmail for an ISP

Thanks all for the comment

Re: any comment on this line

[Brett Randall]

> "Yamin" == Yamin Prabudy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:


Please read the archives or we may have to shoot you. They are there
for a reason.

http://www-archive.ornl.gov:8000/
-- 
"Pascal, n.: A programming language named after a man who would turn over
in his grave if he knew about it."

- The Chartered Institution of C Programmers 

Re: any comment on this line

[Andy Bradford]

Thus said "Yamin Prabudy" on Tue, 24 Oct 2000 13:31:42 +0700:

> My friend forwad it to me from http://www.orbs.org/otherresource.html

The URL is actually:

http://www.orbs.org/otherresources.html

I suggest you read it and then take your pick which you want to use...  
When qmail is configured properly you will have no problems just as the 
blurb says, however, it can produce bad results just like any other piece 
of misconfigured software.  If you follow the directions for 
installation at http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html you shouldn't 
have any problems.  Tell your friend he is misinformed...

Andy
-- 
[---[system uptime]]
 12:28am  up 17 days,  3:55,  6 users,  load average: 1.53, 1.42, 1.44