RE: Newbie question

[suresh]

PLEASE DO NOT READ NEWBIE QUESTION IF WANT TO USE THOSE DEROGATORY
STATEMENTS .YU DONT EVEN HELP EITHER .I AM SURE THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO
WOULD LIKE TO HELP!
-Original Message-
From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 6:55 AM
To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch
Subject: Re: Newbie question


Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 13:24 schrieb suresh:

You are giving us much to less infos to help you. Check if the file
mentioned
in the error message exists and is world readable. If not, RTFM before
asking
here.


> Hi
> I have installed qmail-ldap patch,whenever i start the qmail ,i get this
> info
> I have made a file in the control folder and i tried by entering the ip
> address as well as by the dns name
> i am not able start the debug process even after i set the env variable
,Is
> there any particular syntax i should be calling qmail-start for this?
>
>
> bash-2.03# Nov 29 11:11:21 qmailjol qmail: [ID 748625 mail.alert]
> 975467481.7424
> 69 alert: cannot start qmail-lspawn or it had an error! Check if
> ~control/ldapse
> rver exists
>
> Suresh
> Mithi.com Pvt. Ltd.
> --
> Send and receive mail in Indian languages
> Register free at http://www.mailjol.com

--

Henning Brauer |  BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS  |  Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  |  20459 Hamburg
www.bsws.de|  Germany

Re: Newbie question

[Henning Brauer]

Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 15:11 schrieb suresh:

Suresh, for first writing such nonsens to the list and asking me for help off 
list does not fit together. before asking other busy people for help (it is 
no paid support staff here, we all have our work to do!), you should

-have read the docs at least twice
-checked if you fulfilled the requirements for qmail-ldap, both on you 
installation and youself (yes, the wonderfull sentence "you should have 
fairly good knowledge of qmail and ldap..." and so on in bold letters aside 
to the dowload link on the wepages
-if you ask a question, provide all necessary information, in general as much 
as possible. At least OS, versions (including patch version), _complete_ 
logs, configuration
-checked all logs yourself, including ldap logs, set loglevel to highest 
possible value - helps a lot


> PLEASE DO NOT READ NEWBIE QUESTION IF WANT TO USE THOSE DEROGATORY
> STATEMENTS .YU DONT EVEN HELP EITHER .I AM SURE THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO
> WOULD LIKE TO HELP!
> -Original Message-
> From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 6:55 AM
> To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch
> Subject: Re: Newbie question
>
>
> Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 13:24 schrieb suresh:
>
> You are giving us much to less infos to help you. Check if the file
> mentioned
> in the error message exists and is world readable. If not, RTFM before
> asking
> here.
>
> > Hi
> > I have installed qmail-ldap patch,whenever i start the qmail ,i get this
> > info
> > I have made a file in the control folder and i tried by entering the ip
> > address as well as by the dns name
> > i am not able start the debug process even after i set the env variable
>
> ,Is
>
> > there any particular syntax i should be calling qmail-start for this?
> >
> >
> > bash-2.03# Nov 29 11:11:21 qmailjol qmail: [ID 748625 mail.alert]
> > 975467481.7424
> > 69 alert: cannot start qmail-lspawn or it had an error! Check if
> > ~control/ldapse
> > rver exists
> >
> > Suresh
> > Mithi.com Pvt. Ltd.
> > --
> > Send and receive mail in Indian languages
> > Register free at http://www.mailjol.com
>
> --
>
> Henning Brauer |  BS Web Services
> Hostmaster BSWS  |  Roedingsmarkt 14
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]  |  20459 Hamburg
> www.bsws.de|  Germany

-- 

Henning Brauer |  BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS  |  Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  |  20459 Hamburg
www.bsws.de|  Germany

(no subject)

[Ismail YENIGUL]

qmail Digest 29 Nov 2000 11:00:00 -0000 Issue 1198

[qmail-digest-help]

qmail Digest 29 Nov 2000 11:00:00 - Issue 1198

Topics (messages 52957 through 53015):

rblsmtpd and firewall
52957 by: Roberto Samarone Araujo \(RSA\)
52958 by: Chris Johnson
52959 by: Roberto Samarone Araujo \(RSA\)
52960 by: Chris Johnson

Re: qmail-ldap-mysql
52961 by: Henning Brauer

qmail imapd?
52962 by: achim.venus
52963 by: Peter Green

Re: Henning Brauer's reply
52964 by: Henning Brauer

Re: Please Help me: supervise:fatal
52965 by: Charles Cazabon

Handling To: entries (defaulthost?)
52966 by: Wolfgang Zeikat
52967 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
52990 by: Wolfgang Zeikat

Re: pop3 question??
52968 by: markd.bushwire.net

creating an aliases.cdb without newaliases?
52969 by: Collin B. McClendon
52982 by: Alex Pennace

qmail startup error --xrealloc: cannot reallocate...
52970 by: Trey Nolen

smtp auth over sasl
52971 by: achim.venus

The whole mail puts into the local queue?
52972 by: eric yu
52973 by: Peter Samuel
52974 by: Kris Kelley
52978 by: Peter Samuel
52979 by: Kris Kelley
52980 by: Peter Samuel

qmail startup error --xrealloc: cannot reallocate..
52975 by: Trey Nolen

qmail-pop3d
52976 by: Antonio S. Martins Jr.

Blocking qmails by subject
52977 by: Roberto Samarone Araujo \(RSA\)

virtual domains
52981 by: Rick Glunt
52996 by: Alex Pennace

Install and communicate two qmail servers is possible?
52983 by: Ould
52986 by: markd.bushwire.net

unable to control /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send
52984 by: Silberman, Malcolm (BHR)
52987 by: markd.bushwire.net
52991 by: Silberman, Malcolm (BHR)
52992 by: Silberman, Malcolm (BHR)
52994 by: markd.bushwire.net
52995 by: Robin S. Socha
52998 by: Silberman, Malcolm (BHR)

qmail logging
52985 by: Chris Olson

Error messages - what do they mean?
52988 by: Johan Almqvist
52989 by: markd.bushwire.net
52993 by: Johan Almqvist

How to use qmail to get mails of a different domaine?
52997 by: Ould

qmail capasity ?
52999 by: Are Haugsdal
53000 by: Thorkild Stray

Re: Amazon says the book will be out next month.  Russ?
53001 by: Russell Nelson

Re: ORBS helps hackers to break into srevers
53002 by: Russell Nelson
53009 by: Piotr Kasztelowicz

more than 65535 accounts on one mail server
53003 by: corvus.vadept.com
53005 by: Sean Reifschneider
53006 by: Henning Brauer

Re: secrets and lies
53004 by: Russell Nelson

newbie question
53007 by: suresh
53008 by: Henning Brauer
53012 by: suresh
53013 by: Henning Brauer

Relaying Question (Wait! I read the FAQ and searched the archives)
53010 by: corvus.vadept.com
53011 by: Alex Pennace

(no subject)
53014 by: Ismail YENIGUL

IsoQlog Qmail Log Analyzer
53015 by: Ismail YENIGUL

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 turned on my firewall and I looked at my logs when I found this message:

smtpd: 975401579.539737 tcpserver: fatal: unable to figure out
port number for /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd

What's the port number and protocol(TCP or UDP) that rblsmtpd use ?

thanks,

Roberto Samarone Araujo





On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 09:00:04AM -0300, Roberto Samarone Araujo (RSA) wrote:
> I turned on my firewall and I looked at my logs when I found this message:
> 
> smtpd: 975401579.539737 tcpserver: fatal: unable to figure out
> port number for /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd
> 
> What's the port number and protocol(TCP or UDP) that rblsmtpd use ?

Your startup script is messed up. Post it and someone will tell you how to fix
it.

Chris




>
> Your startup script is messed up. Post it and someone will tell you how to
fix
> it.
>
Ok ...

I put in my qmail.rc this :

 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -b 64 -c 64 -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -g 82 -u 82 -t 600
0 /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 |
/var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd &

thanks

Roberto Samarone Araujo






On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 09:37:40AM -0300, Roberto Samarone Araujo (RSA) wrote:
>  /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -b 64 -c 64 -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -g 82 -u 82 -t 600
> 0 /usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 |
> /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd &

You're missing the port argument. You need to put "smtp" between "0" and
"/usr/local/bin/rblsmtpd."

Chris




Am Dienstag, 28. N

IsoQlog Qmail Log Analyzer

[Ismail YENIGUL]

hii
i write an qmail log analyzer in PERL

here is description:

   IsoQlog is a qmail log analysis program written in Perl. It is
designed to scan qmail logfiles and produce usage statistics in HTML
format for viewing through a Web
   browser. It produces top domains output according to incoming,
outgoing, and total mails. It maintains your main domain mail statistics
per day and per month, likewebalizer.
it is under GPL licences

if you interest you can  get it from
http://www.students.itu.edu.tr/~yenigul
thanx
bye

dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Visar Emini]

I have a strange situation.

In my .qmail file I specify a local path of my ./Maildir/ where a copy of
message should be kept:
/path/to/my/maildir/
But this line is treated as e-mail address not as a local path?
I get an error saying that:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is not listed in control/locals ... etc.

Does anyone have an idea what hte problem could be?

Thanks

Visar

There are mistake?

[Ould]

Hi,

I have a doubt if there is no mistake in Sill's script

/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send/log/run

Is qmail-send not forgot in 

exec /usr/ qmaill /usr/ t /var/log/qmail/?

Also:

are cotes in $MAXSMTPD, $QMAILDUID,$NOFILESGID are
necessary?
When he included rblmstpd there are cotes only on
$MAXSMTPD!
Any we must to use?

Thanks

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/

Re: qmail imapd?

[Jose AP Celestino]

At 02:33 PM 11/28/00 +0100, you wrote:
>hello list,
>
>i'm new to qmail.
>i've installed successfully qmail, qmail-smtpd and qmail-pop3d.
>i would like to know if there's an imap server - working together with 
>qmail - too?

Try Courier-imap.

>regards
>achim
>

japc.

Re: IsoQlog Qmail Log Analyzer

[Ralph Hackl]

That great!
Can you add some user statistics, to view amount of outgouing and incomming
mails?

thank you
Ralph

--
>Von: Ismail YENIGUL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>An: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Betreff: IsoQlog Qmail Log Analyzer
>Datum: Mit, 29. Nov 2000 12:51 Uhr
>

> hii
> i write an qmail log analyzer in PERL
>
> here is description:
>
>IsoQlog is a qmail log analysis program written in Perl. It is
> designed to scan qmail logfiles and produce usage statistics in HTML
> format for viewing through a Web
>browser. It produces top domains output according to incoming,
> outgoing, and total mails. It maintains your main domain mail statistics
> per day and per month, likewebalizer.
> it is under GPL licences
>
> if you interest you can  get it from
> http://www.students.itu.edu.tr/~yenigul
> thanx
> bye
>
> 

Re: IsoQlog Qmail Log Analyzer

[Jose AP Celestino]

Ismail YENIGUL wrote:

> hii
> i write an qmail log analyzer in PERL
>
> here is description:
>
>IsoQlog is a qmail log analysis program written in Perl. It is
> designed to scan qmail logfiles and produce usage statistics in HTML
> format for viewing through a Web
>browser. It produces top domains output according to incoming,
> outgoing, and total mails. It maintains your main domain mail statistics
> per day and per month, likewebalizer.
> it is under GPL licences
>

Hmm, this doesn work with TAI64N timestamps. Considering using tai64nlocal?

>
> if you interest you can  get it from
> http://www.students.itu.edu.tr/~yenigul
> thanx
> bye

-
Jose AP Celestino
SAPO / PT Multimedia
SysAdmining
--

SSL in qmail

[Hans-Juergen Schwarz]

Hello all,
I´m running qmail 1.03 and vpopmail 4.9.4 with the
--enable-roaming-users feature and smtp-auth. Now I have found a ssl
patch under http://www.esat.kuleuven.ac.be/~vermeule/qmail/tls.patch
does anybody use this one? If yes I got a few questions
Does it work together with my configuration? Cause many Clients
don´t work with ssl and I need every possibility to control relaying
I got many virtuell Users, does everybody need a cert or just the key
from the communicating Server?
How do I apply the patch to the conf Files? per typing?
Is there anywhere a site to find more information about this, cause
I think I don´t really understand how it works.
Thank you very much

Hans-Juergen

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Hans-Juergen Schwarz]

Hallo Visar,

Wednesday, November 29, 2000, 11:59:32 AM, you wrote:

> I have a strange situation.

> In my .qmail file I specify a local path of my ./Maildir/ where a copy of
> message should be kept:
> /path/to/my/maildir/
> But this line is treated as e-mail address not as a local path?
> I get an error saying that:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not listed in control/locals ... etc.

I don´t know. I´m using vpopmail and do the same trick to deliver
Mails to my local users and it works fine. But vpopmail does it a
bit different to the qmail installation, so maybe I´m just lucky
that it works. But I would be interessted about the problem, too
Regards

Hans-Juergen

Re: qmail capasity ?

[Charles Cazabon]

Are Haugsdal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Would it be difficult, or problematic to allow a customer to use 1 000 pop3
> email accounts ? 

No.  It may be even less of a problem, though, to use a virtual domain mail
manager so you don't need to set up system accounts, etc.  "vmailmgr" by
Bruce Guenter is commonly used; find it at www.vmailmgr.org .

Didn't you ask this same question yesterday?  Didn't you like the answers you
received then?

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: There are mistake?

[Charles Cazabon]

Ould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> I have a doubt if there is no mistake in Sill's script
> 
> /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send/log/run
> 
> Is qmail-send not forgot in 
> 
> exec /usr/ qmaill /usr/ t /var/log/qmail/?

Dave Sill's script is correct.

> Also:
> 
> are cotes in $MAXSMTPD, $QMAILDUID,$NOFILESGID are
> necessary?

Quoting shell variables is a good habit to get into, lest you have an 
accident when dealing with someone who supplies a value of
"foo ; rm -rf /" for a variable you're dealing with.

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.
---

List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Jamin Collins]

I may be out of line here.  However, this is not the first time I've seen
snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help.  I
am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent.  

Sure, some of the postings for help may not contain all the information that
a more experienced person would have.  But to respond to them with a
statement to the effect of "send all necessary information" is crazy.  There
is a certain level of experience necessary to know what may or may not be
needed to diagnose a problem.  As many of the people posting without this
level of information are new to either Linux or qmail (or both) there needs
to be some understanding on everyone's behalf.  And telling someone to RTFM
is normally of little to no help.  I've been told several times to RTFM
without any indication as to which manual.  This is of little to no help to
anyone.

As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the installation
instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate.  I
tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the source
twice, with no luck.  Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck.  It
wasn't until I purchased "Running qmail." that I actually got the thing to
work.  I'm sure that if I went back to either set of instructions (source or
LWQ) that both would be adequate for the installation now that I've done it
before.  However herein lies the problem.  The documentation that currently
exists is really only helpful to someone that has already installed the
software once before.  But, I've digressed.

IMHO, everyone that is offering help via a list such as this should be
courteous to those asking for help.  If you can't be courteous, I ask that
you please refrain from posting.  Snapping at a user asking for help will
accomplish nothing more than making the user angry and hesitant from posting
in the future.  IIRC, these are not the goals of this list or any other
support list.

I realize, as do most of the user's posting, that support here is provided
by individuals donating their time of their own free will.  All I ask is
that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help.

Jamin W. Collins

-Original Message-
From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 3:11 AM
To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Newbie question


Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 15:11 schrieb suresh:

Suresh, for first writing such nonsens to the list and asking me for help
off 
list does not fit together. before asking other busy people for help (it is 
no paid support staff here, we all have our work to do!), you should

-have read the docs at least twice
-checked if you fulfilled the requirements for qmail-ldap, both on you 
installation and youself (yes, the wonderfull sentence "you should have 
fairly good knowledge of qmail and ldap..." and so on in bold letters aside 
to the dowload link on the wepages
-if you ask a question, provide all necessary information, in general as
much 
as possible. At least OS, versions (including patch version), _complete_ 
logs, configuration
-checked all logs yourself, including ldap logs, set loglevel to highest 
possible value - helps a lot


> PLEASE DO NOT READ NEWBIE QUESTION IF WANT TO USE THOSE DEROGATORY
> STATEMENTS .YU DONT EVEN HELP EITHER .I AM SURE THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO
> WOULD LIKE TO HELP!
> -Original Message-
> From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 6:55 AM
> To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch
> Subject: Re: Newbie question
>
>
> Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 13:24 schrieb suresh:
>
> You are giving us much to less infos to help you. Check if the file
> mentioned
> in the error message exists and is world readable. If not, RTFM before
> asking
> here.
>
> > Hi
> > I have installed qmail-ldap patch,whenever i start the qmail ,i get this
> > info
> > I have made a file in the control folder and i tried by entering the ip
> > address as well as by the dns name
> > i am not able start the debug process even after i set the env variable
>
> ,Is
>
> > there any particular syntax i should be calling qmail-start for this?
> >
> >
> > bash-2.03# Nov 29 11:11:21 qmailjol qmail: [ID 748625 mail.alert]
> > 975467481.7424
> > 69 alert: cannot start qmail-lspawn or it had an error! Check if
> > ~control/ldapse
> > rver exists
> >
> > Suresh
> > Mithi.com Pvt. Ltd.
> > --
> > Send and receive mail in Indian languages
> > Register free at http://www.mailjol.com
>
> --
>
> Henning Brauer |  BS Web Services
> Hostmaster BSWS  |  Roedingsmarkt 14
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]  |  20459 Hamburg
> www.bsws.de|  Germany

-- 

Henning Brauer |  BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS  |  Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  |  20459 Hamburg
www.bsws.de|  Germany

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Warren Small]

I absolutely agree with this. I have never seen so many rude and useless
responses to pleas for help on any other list that I subscribe to. Yes,
there are times when the answer is documented somewhere but the
documentation available is poorly organized making it very difficult for
someone who is new to their operating system and/or qmail to find the
answer.

For me, I was able to get qmail working with the INSTALL files for at least
my simple test system. I have not tried to install using LWQ but I couldn't
help but notice some differences in the way things are installed using LWQ
versus the INSTALL files. Now which is right? 

One of the reasons I am trying qmail is that I heard it was far more
efficient than using sendmail especially when handling large volumes of
mail. This fact, at least, seems to be true for the tests I have run. My
next goal was to migrate all of our domains from sendmail to qmail but
considering the documentation and some of the support that has been
forthcoming from this list, I have my doubts about reccommending that
course of action.

Don't get me wrong, I have seen and received useful help from this list.
Hopefully, we can all learn to be tolerent of people who ask questions that
have "obvious" answers. I think we have all been there before.

Warren Small

Jamin Collins wrote:
> 
> I may be out of line here.  However, this is not the first time I've seen
> snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help.  I
> am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent.
> 
> Sure, some of the postings for help may not contain all the information that
> a more experienced person would have.  But to respond to them with a
> statement to the effect of "send all necessary information" is crazy.  There
> is a certain level of experience necessary to know what may or may not be
> needed to diagnose a problem.  As many of the people posting without this
> level of information are new to either Linux or qmail (or both) there needs
> to be some understanding on everyone's behalf.  And telling someone to RTFM
> is normally of little to no help.  I've been told several times to RTFM
> without any indication as to which manual.  This is of little to no help to
> anyone.
> 
> As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the installation
> instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate.  I
> tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the source
> twice, with no luck.  Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck.  It
> wasn't until I purchased "Running qmail." that I actually got the thing to
> work.  I'm sure that if I went back to either set of instructions (source or
> LWQ) that both would be adequate for the installation now that I've done it
> before.  However herein lies the problem.  The documentation that currently
> exists is really only helpful to someone that has already installed the
> software once before.  But, I've digressed.
> 
> IMHO, everyone that is offering help via a list such as this should be
> courteous to those asking for help.  If you can't be courteous, I ask that
> you please refrain from posting.  Snapping at a user asking for help will
> accomplish nothing more than making the user angry and hesitant from posting
> in the future.  IIRC, these are not the goals of this list or any other
> support list.
> 
> I realize, as do most of the user's posting, that support here is provided
> by individuals donating their time of their own free will.  All I ask is
> that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help.
> 
> Jamin W. Collins
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 3:11 AM
> To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Newbie question
> 
> Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 15:11 schrieb suresh:
> 
> Suresh, for first writing such nonsens to the list and asking me for help
> off
> list does not fit together. before asking other busy people for help (it is
> no paid support staff here, we all have our work to do!), you should
> 
> -have read the docs at least twice
> -checked if you fulfilled the requirements for qmail-ldap, both on you
> installation and youself (yes, the wonderfull sentence "you should have
> fairly good knowledge of qmail and ldap..." and so on in bold letters aside
> to the dowload link on the wepages
> -if you ask a question, provide all necessary information, in general as
> much
> as possible. At least OS, versions (including patch version), _complete_
> logs, configuration
> -checked all logs yourself, including ldap logs, set loglevel to highest
> possible value - helps a lot
> 
> > PLEASE DO NOT READ NEWBIE QUESTION IF WANT TO USE THOSE DEROGATORY
> > STATEMENTS .YU DONT EVEN HELP EITHER .I AM SURE THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO
> > WOULD LIKE TO HELP!
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PRO

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Robin S. Socha]

* Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whines:

> I may be out of line here.  However, this is not the first time I've
> seen snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking
> for help.  I am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent.

*sigh* Is it September again? Just for completeness' sake: not only is
your MUA broken to the degree of utter braindeadness, you've also included
60 linux of *un*quoted quotes. Has anyone called you a clueless luser
lately?

> There is a certain level of experience necessary to know what may or
> may not be needed to diagnose a problem.  As many of the people
> posting without this level of information are new to either Linux or
> qmail (or both) there needs to be some understanding on everyone's
> behalf.  

Like what? If you need professional support, there are links galore on
http://qmail.org/. If you want to be spoonfed, you're simply looking in
the wrong place.

> And telling someone to RTFM is normally of little to no help.  

The qmail docs are terse but exhaustive. We're not talking about running
$PORNO_VIEWER.exe but about a mail server - if you're too stupid to
manage even the initial setup, you *just* *don't* *need* *one*.

> As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the
> installation instructions with qmail itself are for the most part
> highly inadequate.

Not quite. They're just not idiot-proof. But you've found that our
yourself already.

> I tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the
> source twice, with no luck.  

See, that's your problem: contrary to popular superstition (fed by the
New Cultural Imperialism from Redmond) it does not take /luck/ to install
software. It takes /knowledge/. You appear to have neither. Well, tough
luck.

> Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck.  

Yeah, right, Dave Sill really *is* an asshole: charging breathtaking
amounts of money for his crappy docs and not even dumbing them down so
that an amoeba^W^Wyou can understand them. It's free software, lackwit:
contribute nothing, expect nothing. Why didn't you fix the passages that
were "inadequate" and send Dave the patches, Jamin?

> [...] The documentation that currently exists is really only helpful
> to someone that has already installed the software once before.

U... nope.

> [...] Snapping at a user asking for help will accomplish nothing more
> than making the user angry and hesitant from posting in the future.

Do I care about angry lusers? I don't think so. Is it a Good Thing if
they don't bother people trying to get some work done? Sure is. So there.

> IIRC, these are not the goals of this list or any other support list.

It might come as a suprise to you and your likes, but this is /not/ a
support list. It's a discussion list. If you want support, you can find
the links to comm...

> All I ask is that common courtesy be extended to those asking for
> help.

Sure. Now, be a kind luser and do your reading. When you're done and
have reached the minimum level of cluefullness required for running an
internet service, come back and ask informed questions.

Sometimes I wonder what brings people like you to posting this whining
luser shit over and over and over again? This is not your new-age pink
treehuggers society - this is a technical discussion list. IT-Darwinism,
y'know? Survival of the brightest and, like, stuff. Huh-huh.
-- 
Robin S. Socha 
Enhanced for MSIE 5.5: 

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Henning Brauer]

I don't see your problem. he was on the wrong list as this is qmail-ldap 
specific. he posted to the qmail-ldap list too, so nobody can tell me he 
didn't know about this list. I answered anyway.  I asked him if the file 
mentioned in the error msg exists. if so, i requested more info than one line 
of log. if not this had proven that he didn't read a single line of 
documentation.

in general everybody posting questions here should have a thought who's 
answering, and that these people are no paid support staff. so i can expect 
that the poster has
-read the docs
-spent some thoughts one what he's writing
-spent some thoughts on what information would be needed for support
-provided full logs somewhere for download

If he only posts a single line from the log without even mentioning the file 
exists and it is readable, without telling us os, qmail version, patch 
version, ldap server and version, it's somehow sure that he hasn't spent any 
thought on that.
Dan used a subject of "How to discourage free software support" on a mail 
regarding this on the dns list. that's exactly the point IMHO.

btw, i did my first qmail installation (long tome ago...) within one hour and 
without any third party documentation aside from a problem with daemontools, 
i solved this with a short look to lwq. i don't know why you did not succeed, 
but telling us "the docs are all so bad because i couldn't install qmail with 
them" is an inadequate statement.

Greetings

Henning

-- 

Henning Brauer |  BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS  |  Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  |  20459 Hamburg
www.bsws.de|  Germany

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Jamin Collins]

How exactly is my MUA broken?

I've included the original text of the message I've responded to.  I've
simply chosen not to add anything to the beginning of each line of the
original message.

Now, you've resorted to name calling?  Quite the original.

How does a request for common courtesy indicate a need for professional
help?

Telling someone to RTFM would be helpful, if the manual being referenced as
indicated.  As there are several files in the qmail distribution that all
refer to other documents, it is possible that some may not locate the
correct manual.

When exactly did I call Dave Sill an asshole?  I simply made meantion that
his HOWTO did not assist in my configuration of qmail.  This is not a
derogatory statement in any fashion.  Simply a statement of fact.  As for
providing clarifications to the document, I very well may once I have qmail
configured the way I would like it.

If you see the questions of users on this list as bothersome, I'm sorry.
However, as membership to the list is voluntary, you are not being forced to
read them.  In short, if you don't like them, don't read them.  

What brings me to post?  Simple, I like to help people learn more about
computing.  I also like to learn what I can where I can.  Again, I'm sorry
this doesn't fight your perception of the computer industry.

Jamin W. Collins


-Original Message-
From: Robin S. Socha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 9:19 AM
To: qmail mailing list
Subject: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)


* Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whines:

> I may be out of line here.  However, this is not the first time I've
> seen snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking
> for help.  I am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent.

*sigh* Is it September again? Just for completeness' sake: not only is
your MUA broken to the degree of utter braindeadness, you've also included
60 linux of *un*quoted quotes. Has anyone called you a clueless luser
lately?

> There is a certain level of experience necessary to know what may or
> may not be needed to diagnose a problem.  As many of the people
> posting without this level of information are new to either Linux or
> qmail (or both) there needs to be some understanding on everyone's
> behalf.  

Like what? If you need professional support, there are links galore on
http://qmail.org/. If you want to be spoonfed, you're simply looking in
the wrong place.

> And telling someone to RTFM is normally of little to no help.  

The qmail docs are terse but exhaustive. We're not talking about running
$PORNO_VIEWER.exe but about a mail server - if you're too stupid to
manage even the initial setup, you *just* *don't* *need* *one*.

> As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the
> installation instructions with qmail itself are for the most part
> highly inadequate.

Not quite. They're just not idiot-proof. But you've found that our
yourself already.

> I tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the
> source twice, with no luck.  

See, that's your problem: contrary to popular superstition (fed by the
New Cultural Imperialism from Redmond) it does not take /luck/ to install
software. It takes /knowledge/. You appear to have neither. Well, tough
luck.

> Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck.  

Yeah, right, Dave Sill really *is* an asshole: charging breathtaking
amounts of money for his crappy docs and not even dumbing them down so
that an amoeba^W^Wyou can understand them. It's free software, lackwit:
contribute nothing, expect nothing. Why didn't you fix the passages that
were "inadequate" and send Dave the patches, Jamin?

> [...] The documentation that currently exists is really only helpful
> to someone that has already installed the software once before.

U... nope.

> [...] Snapping at a user asking for help will accomplish nothing more
> than making the user angry and hesitant from posting in the future.

Do I care about angry lusers? I don't think so. Is it a Good Thing if
they don't bother people trying to get some work done? Sure is. So there.

> IIRC, these are not the goals of this list or any other support list.

It might come as a suprise to you and your likes, but this is /not/ a
support list. It's a discussion list. If you want support, you can find
the links to comm...

> All I ask is that common courtesy be extended to those asking for
> help.

Sure. Now, be a kind luser and do your reading. When you're done and
have reached the minimum level of cluefullness required for running an
internet service, come back and ask informed questions.

Sometimes I wonder what brings people like you to posting this whining
luser shit over and over and over again? This is not your new-age pink
treehuggers society - this is a technical discussion list. IT-Darwinism,
y'know? Survival of the brightest and, like, stuff. Huh-huh.
-- 
Robin S. Socha 
Enhanced for MSIE 5.5: 

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Amitai Schlair]

on 11/29/00 9:47 AM, Jamin Collins at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> All I ask is that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help.

The people who often provide help simply expect the same sort of courtesy.
Remember who's doing whom the favor, and that this list is about qmail, not
Unix.

If you want to learn Unix, either find a Unix (list|book|shell) and use it,
or cleverly couch your Unix difficulties to appear as politely framed qmail
questions.

- Amitai

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Amitai Schlair]

on 11/29/00 11:10 AM, Jamin Collins at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> If you see the questions of users on this list as bothersome, I'm sorry.
> However, as membership to the list is voluntary, you are not being forced to
> read them.  In short, if you don't like them, don't read them.

Sure. And if you don't like the responses you get, you're also free to
ignore them, or to unsubscribe.

- Amitai

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Milen Petrinski]

Hi,
will anybody answer this question? I have the same problem :-( I'm trying to
write a .qmail file, to allow to forward the messages to that user and to
leave a copy in user's maildir.

be-01:/home/vpopmail/domains/bates.eu.com/mpetrinski# more .qmail
./Maildir/
office

As written in dot-qmail man page, this should work fine, but qmail
interpretes the ./Maildir/ line as address, not es maildir path. Why?

Milen


- Original Message -
From: "Visar Emini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 12:59 PM
Subject: dot-qmail question (again) :-)


> I have a strange situation.
>
> In my .qmail file I specify a local path of my ./Maildir/ where a copy of
> message should be kept:
> /path/to/my/maildir/
> But this line is treated as e-mail address not as a local path?
> I get an error saying that:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not listed in control/locals ...
etc.
>
> Does anyone have an idea what hte problem could be?
>
> Thanks
>
> Visar
>
>

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Jamin Collins]

Since you've asked, my problem with your posting specifically is as follows:

>Suresh, for first writing such nonsens to the list and asking me for help
>off 
>list does not fit together. before asking other busy people for help (it is

>no paid support staff here, we all have our work to do!), you should

There is no need to refer to his posting as "such nonsense".  Additionally,
there is no call/need for the statement about "busy people".  I believe it
is well known that people read this list on their time and any answer is
essentially a donation from their time.  However, conversely, no one is
forced to read or answer these postings.  Everyone (to my knowledge) does
this of their own free will.  As such, asking for help (whether on the right
list or not) is in no way wrong.  Berating someone for doing so is rude.

I'm glad your installation went so smoothly.  However, many other's do not.
I'm sure that many of these come down to simply syntax errors.  I will admit
that I had a few in my first installations.  These would have been easily
corrected by another set of eyes.  However, due to the repeatedly rude and
snappy reply's from this list, I did not post concerning my initial
problems.

As for the statement you claim I made "the docs are all so bad because i
couldn't install qmail with 
them", I did not say this.  I simply stated that I was unsuccessfull in my
attempts to install qmail using them.  I did not state they were bad, I even
stated that I was sure they would be of help if I were to use them at my
current point.  In short, I believe they may be a little lacking when it
comes to helping someone completely new to qmail.  This may not be the case
of all new users, but it is the case for at least a few.

Jamin W. Collins



-Original Message-
From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 9:35 AM
To: Jamin Collins; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)


I don't see your problem. he was on the wrong list as this is qmail-ldap 
specific. he posted to the qmail-ldap list too, so nobody can tell me he 
didn't know about this list. I answered anyway.  I asked him if the file 
mentioned in the error msg exists. if so, i requested more info than one
line 
of log. if not this had proven that he didn't read a single line of 
documentation.

in general everybody posting questions here should have a thought who's 
answering, and that these people are no paid support staff. so i can expect 
that the poster has
-read the docs
-spent some thoughts one what he's writing
-spent some thoughts on what information would be needed for support
-provided full logs somewhere for download

If he only posts a single line from the log without even mentioning the file

exists and it is readable, without telling us os, qmail version, patch 
version, ldap server and version, it's somehow sure that he hasn't spent any

thought on that.
Dan used a subject of "How to discourage free software support" on a mail 
regarding this on the dns list. that's exactly the point IMHO.

btw, i did my first qmail installation (long tome ago...) within one hour
and 
without any third party documentation aside from a problem with daemontools,

i solved this with a short look to lwq. i don't know why you did not
succeed, 
but telling us "the docs are all so bad because i couldn't install qmail
with 
them" is an inadequate statement.

Greetings

Henning

-- 

Henning Brauer |  BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS  |  Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  |  20459 Hamburg
www.bsws.de|  Germany

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Jamin Collins]

I'm sorry, I don't recall having posted a Unix question to this list.
However, if some did perchance make that mistake, is it really so difficult
to politely point them to the correct list?

Jamin W. Collins

-Original Message-
From: Amitai Schlair [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 10:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)


on 11/29/00 9:47 AM, Jamin Collins at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> All I ask is that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help.

The people who often provide help simply expect the same sort of courtesy.
Remember who's doing whom the favor, and that this list is about qmail, not
Unix.

If you want to learn Unix, either find a Unix (list|book|shell) and use it,
or cleverly couch your Unix difficulties to appear as politely framed qmail
questions.

- Amitai

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Greg Owen]

> How exactly is my MUA broken?

It isn't, the user is broken.  The user incorrectly decided that
everyone would just love to see the full text of the original message
(perhaps in case they inexplicably missed it the first time!), and that it
needed no marking to make it clear to readers that it isn't new material.

-- 
gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Romeyn Prescott]

>Sometimes I wonder what brings people like you to posting this whining
>luser shit over and over and over again? This is not your new-age pink
>treehuggers society - this is a technical discussion list. IT-Darwinism,
>y'know? Survival of the brightest and, like, stuff. Huh-huh.
>--
>Robin S. Socha

If this list were, as it seems you, sir/ma'am (sorry, your name is 
gender-neutral), would prefer, populated exclusively by people who 
already know all there is to know about qmail; about what (I'm 
curious) would you discuss?

Perhaps we should ask someone to start a qmail-newbies list so that 
A) the newbies can go somewhere where they know they stand a chance 
of at least having their issues addressed by other more knowledgeable 
individuals who don't MIND helping the "clueless" because they were 
"there" too one day; and B) the elitists won't be bothered anymore 
and can commence to posting messages in binary and stop catering to 
us idiots who are still hung up on the inefficiencies of English as a 
language.

:-|

...ROMeyn
-- 


signat-url: http://www2.potsdam.edu/dctm/prescor/signat-url.htm
cubiclecam: http://digirom.potsdam.edu/~prescor/cubiclecam.html
^^^ <--- Off-line unless someone knows how to get camserv to
 compile under RedHat 7...  *sigh*  :-(

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Alex Pennace]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 06:09:04PM +0200, Milen Petrinski wrote:
> I'm trying to
> write a .qmail file, to allow to forward the messages to that user and to
> leave a copy in user's maildir.
> 
> be-01:/home/vpopmail/domains/bates.eu.com/mpetrinski# more .qmail
> ./Maildir/
> office
> 
> As written in dot-qmail man page, this should work fine, but qmail
> interpretes the ./Maildir/ line as address, not es maildir path. Why?

What do the logs say?

 PGP signature

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Robin S. Socha]

* Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How exactly is my MUA broken?  

* Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
* No reference headers (*GREAT* for breaking archives)
* 6 attribution lines
* No citation leader 
* Trailing blank line

> I've included the original text of the message I've responded to.

How very useful.

> I've simply chosen not to add anything to the beginning of each line
> of the original message.

Rather "I'm too fscking stupid to even find it among 2001 menues in
Outlook", eh? 

> How does a request for common courtesy indicate a need for
> professional help?

In general or in your particular case?

> What brings me to post?  Simple, I like to help people learn more
> about computing.  

The blind leading... C'mon, Jamin, you've had your 264 lines of fame. Now
go away, will you? You're about to start a war you'll never understand.
-- 
Robin S. Socha 

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Amitai Schlair]

on 11/29/00 11:22 AM, Jamin Collins at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> As such, asking for help (whether on the right list or not) is in no way
> wrong.  Berating someone for doing so is rude.

It might also be considered rude to post to the wrong list, or to ask for
help without providing useful information.

> However, due to the repeatedly rude and snappy reply's from this list, I did
> not post concerning my initial problems.

You most definitely won't get help that way!

> In short, I believe [the docs] may be a little lacking when it comes to
> helping someone completely new to qmail.

s/qmail/Unix/, and I'd agree. But I wouldn't call that a shortcoming of the
documentation.

- Amitai

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[John W. Lemons III]

I've seen this over and over and over.  Someone joins the list, probably
because they are having problems (the same reason I joined), posts a
question, and then has to wade through the wave of crap thrown back at them
by a bunch of rude jerks with nothing better to do with their time that to
berate you and tell you they are too busy to be bothered.  The mind boggles
at how important their work is that they are unable to help, yet they have
plenty of time to post novella's about how busy they are and how lazy you
are for not solving the problem without their help.  I gotta hint, don't
wanna bother with a person's question?  DON'T ANSWER IT!  There, wasn't that
easy?

On a side note, I've tried to unsubscribe from the list because of exactly
this kind of crap from self-important jerks who seem to get a charge out of
kicking people when they are down, but the damn server tells me I'm not
subscribed so it can't unsubscribe me.  Go figure.

-Original Message-
From: Jamin Collins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 10:22 AM
To: 'Henning Brauer'; Jamin Collins; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)


Since you've asked, my problem with your posting specifically is as follows:

>Suresh, for first writing such nonsens to the list and asking me for help
>off
>list does not fit together. before asking other busy people for help (it is

>no paid support staff here, we all have our work to do!), you should

There is no need to refer to his posting as "such nonsense".  Additionally,
there is no call/need for the statement about "busy people".  I believe it
is well known that people read this list on their time and any answer is
essentially a donation from their time.  However, conversely, no one is
forced to read or answer these postings.  Everyone (to my knowledge) does
this of their own free will.  As such, asking for help (whether on the right
list or not) is in no way wrong.  Berating someone for doing so is rude.

I'm glad your installation went so smoothly.  However, many other's do not.
I'm sure that many of these come down to simply syntax errors.  I will admit
that I had a few in my first installations.  These would have been easily
corrected by another set of eyes.  However, due to the repeatedly rude and
snappy reply's from this list, I did not post concerning my initial
problems.

As for the statement you claim I made "the docs are all so bad because i
couldn't install qmail with
them", I did not say this.  I simply stated that I was unsuccessfull in my
attempts to install qmail using them.  I did not state they were bad, I even
stated that I was sure they would be of help if I were to use them at my
current point.  In short, I believe they may be a little lacking when it
comes to helping someone completely new to qmail.  This may not be the case
of all new users, but it is the case for at least a few.

Jamin W. Collins



-Original Message-
From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 9:35 AM
To: Jamin Collins; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)


I don't see your problem. he was on the wrong list as this is qmail-ldap
specific. he posted to the qmail-ldap list too, so nobody can tell me he
didn't know about this list. I answered anyway.  I asked him if the file
mentioned in the error msg exists. if so, i requested more info than one
line
of log. if not this had proven that he didn't read a single line of
documentation.

in general everybody posting questions here should have a thought who's
answering, and that these people are no paid support staff. so i can expect
that the poster has
-read the docs
-spent some thoughts one what he's writing
-spent some thoughts on what information would be needed for support
-provided full logs somewhere for download

If he only posts a single line from the log without even mentioning the file

exists and it is readable, without telling us os, qmail version, patch
version, ldap server and version, it's somehow sure that he hasn't spent any

thought on that.
Dan used a subject of "How to discourage free software support" on a mail
regarding this on the dns list. that's exactly the point IMHO.

btw, i did my first qmail installation (long tome ago...) within one hour
and
without any third party documentation aside from a problem with daemontools,

i solved this with a short look to lwq. i don't know why you did not
succeed,
but telling us "the docs are all so bad because i couldn't install qmail
with
them" is an inadequate statement.

Greetings

Henning

--

Henning Brauer |  BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS  |  Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  |  20459 Hamburg
www.bsws.de|  Germany

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Charles Cazabon]

Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How exactly is my MUA broken?
> 
> I've included the original text of the message I've responded to.  I've
> simply chosen not to add anything to the beginning of each line of the
> original message.

Hence the breakage.  Netiquette dictates that replies be identified by
prefacing each line with '> ' or '>' -- many peoples' MUAs highlight text
by looking for these markers.  It makes reading your mail much more difficult
for the rest of us.

> If you see the questions of users on this list as bothersome, I'm sorry.

Most of us don't mind users asking questions, after they have made a
reasonable effort to understand the problem themselves, by doing _all_ of
the following:

-read all the documentation that comes with qmail, preferably at
least twice.  This includes the man pages and other text documentation.
-especially read Dan's FAQs (the one included with the source, and
the one at cr.yp.to)
-read the various hints & tips at www.qmail.org, and the various
user-contributed documentation that are referenced there
-read "Life with qmail" by Dave Sill
-read through the archives of this list for people with similar 
problems in the past.  We've seen all of these questions.

Anyone who posts one of the most-commonly asked questions to the list,
without having done all the above, is (in effect) saying "My time is more
valuable than the time of the people I am asking for help".  Some people tend
to get a little annoyed at this type of attitude.

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: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Milen Petrinski]

Nov 29 15:53:17 be-01 qmail: 975513197.754397 new msg 101388
Nov 29 15:53:17 be-01 qmail: 975513197.754867 info msg 101388: bytes 627
from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 5060 uid 1001
Nov 29 15:53:18 be-01 qmail: 975513198.117625 starting delivery 38: msg
101388 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nov 29 15:53:18 be-01 qmail: 975513198.118082 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.444056 new msg 101743
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.444555 info msg 101743: bytes 749
from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 5149 uid 1011
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.444876 starting delivery 39: msg
101743 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.445124 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.677352 new msg 102149
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.686915 info msg 102149: bytes 749
from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 5157 uid 1011
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.702107 starting delivery 40: msg
102149 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.710230 status: local 3/10 remote 0/20
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.988794 delivery 38: success:
did_0+0+1/
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.997266 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
Nov 29 15:53:22 be-01 qmail: 975513202.005094 end msg 101388

I'm not very experienced, but I don't see anything wrong, exept the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] address.

Milen

- Original Message -
From: "Alex Pennace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Milen Petrinski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 6:30 PM
Subject: Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Milen Petrinski]

Sorry, the previous was not complete, here it is:

Nov 29 15:53:17 be-01 qmail: 975513197.754397 new msg 101388
Nov 29 15:53:17 be-01 qmail: 975513197.754867 info msg 101388: bytes 627
from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 5060 uid 1001
Nov 29 15:53:18 be-01 qmail: 975513198.117625 starting delivery 38: msg
101388 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nov 29 15:53:18 be-01 qmail: 975513198.118082 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.444056 new msg 101743
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.444555 info msg 101743: bytes 749
from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 5149 uid 1011
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.444876 starting delivery 39: msg
101743 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.445124 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.677352 new msg 102149
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.686915 info msg 102149: bytes 749
from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 5157 uid 1011
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.702107 starting delivery 40: msg
102149 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.710230 status: local 3/10 remote 0/20
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.988794 delivery 38: success:
did_0+0+1/
Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.997266 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
Nov 29 15:53:22 be-01 qmail: 975513202.005094 end msg 101388
Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.584003 delivery 39: success:
POP_user_does_not_exist,_but_will_deliver_to_/home/vpopmail/do
mains/bates.eu.com/postmaster/did_0+0+1/
Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.584618 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.584919 end msg 101743
Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.721129 delivery 40: success:
did_0+0+1/
Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.721590 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.721865 end msg 102149

I'm using vpopmail and deliver everithing that has no other recipient to
postmaster.

- Original Message -
From: "Alex Pennace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Milen Petrinski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 6:30 PM
Subject: Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Charles Cazabon]

Milen Petrinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> will anybody answer this question? I have the same problem :-( I'm trying to
> write a .qmail file, to allow to forward the messages to that user and to
> leave a copy in user's maildir.
> 
> be-01:/home/vpopmail/domains/bates.eu.com/mpetrinski# more .qmail
> ./Maildir/
> office
 
> - Original Message -
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not listed in control/locals ...

That's not an error that qmail spits out.  Your .qmail file does not contain
"/path/to/my/maildir/" in it anywhere.  We can't help you without better 
information.

Please post the following:
-relevant portions of the qmail log file(s) (don't re-type
them or remove domain names, etc -- just post them as-is)
-the exact text of the error message you are receiving, if any
-the output of `qmail-showctl` would also be helpful

I'm also suspicious of that "office" line above.  It would appear to me
to forward a copy to "office@defaultdomain", which doesn't sound like what
you want.

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.
---

sending mail to all users

[defender of the protocol]

how can i make an alias (like [EMAIL PROTECTED]) that sends a message to all the 
users on my system? i have several domains hosted.

- jeremy

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Romeyn Prescott]

Try this:

---
/path/to/home/Maildir/
&[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---

...ROMeyn

At 6:09 PM +0200 11/29/00, Milen Petrinski wrote:
>Hi,
>will anybody answer this question? I have the same problem :-( I'm trying to
>write a .qmail file, to allow to forward the messages to that user and to
>leave a copy in user's maildir.
>
>be-01:/home/vpopmail/domains/bates.eu.com/mpetrinski# more .qmail
>./Maildir/
>office
>
>As written in dot-qmail man page, this should work fine, but qmail
>interpretes the ./Maildir/ line as address, not es maildir path. Why?
>
>Milen
>
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Visar Emini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 12:59 PM
>Subject: dot-qmail question (again) :-)
>
>
>>  I have a strange situation.
>>
>>  In my .qmail file I specify a local path of my ./Maildir/ where a copy of
>>  message should be kept:
>>  /path/to/my/maildir/
>>  But this line is treated as e-mail address not as a local path?
>>  I get an error saying that:
>>  [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not listed in control/locals ...
>etc.
>  >
>  > Does anyone have an idea what hte problem could be?
>  >
>  > Thanks
>  >
>  > Visar
>  >
>  >

-- 


signat-url: http://www2.potsdam.edu/dctm/prescor/signat-url.htm
cubiclecam: http://digirom.potsdam.edu/~prescor/cubiclecam.html
^^^ <--- Off-line unless someone knows how to get camserv to
 compile under RedHat 7...  *sigh*  :-(

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[John W. Lemons III]

I don't disagree with anything you said.  My mail wasn't aimed at the people
who politely say RTFM and provide pointers to said FM.  It was aimed at the
jack asses that spend their time berating newbies and clogging the group
with diatribes about how important their time is, rather than providing
constructive input.  If they don't believe the person "deserves" their
input, why spend all that time belittling them?  I don't see how I
misunderstood anything.

-Original Message-
From: Matt Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 11:34 AM
To: John W. Lemons III
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)


"John W. Lemons III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> The mind boggles at how important their work is that they are unable
> to help, yet they have plenty of time to post novella's about how
> busy they are and how lazy you are for not solving the problem
> without their help.

This shows just how much you misunderstand.

The people who know qmail are not mad at you and the people you're
defending because they're too busy, or anything like that.

It's the attitude that mailing lists like this are free resources that
can be exploited.  Places you can take from without giving.

Get this through your head: NOTHING IS FREE.  Nobody is obligated to
help you for free.  Whining because nobody is willing to do your work
for you for no recompense is NOT appreciated.

Sure, nobody gets paid for giving advice here, but it doesn't mean
that it's for free.  The cost of being helped is that YOU have to do
most of the work.  If you don't like that fee structure, then go to
somebody you pay dollars for.

People will willingly volunteer their expertise, their knowledge; they
will NOT volunteer to do all the hard work for you.  Why do you expect
them to?

Re: sending mail to all users

[J.J.Gallardo]

defender of the protocol escribió:

> how can i make an alias (like [EMAIL PROTECTED]) that sends a message to all the
> users on my system? i have several domains hosted.
>
> - jeremy

If you are using "vpopmail" look at "vpopbull" command. Really simple.

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Dave Sill]

Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I may be out of line here.  However, this is not the first time I've seen
>snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help.  I
>am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent.

I'm not a big fan of newbie smackdowns, though a repeat offendor might 
warrant one. I think newbies generally respond better to reward than
punishment. E.g., instead of:

  Your mailer is broken.

I'd say something like:

  Please don't include messages you're replying to as appendages to
  your own messages. It's a waste of bytes, and it annoys many
  people--most of whom are too polite and/or busy to bother
  complaining. Instead, quote small passages, prefixing each line
  with ">". This puts the relevant information right where it's
  needed, and makes it easy for people to tell who said what.

The former approach *might* work, but is more likely to offend the
newbie. The latter is polite and informative. An educated, unoffended
newbie is much more likely to want to change his ways.

>As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the installation
>instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate.

Ouch. "... LWQ ... [is] ... highly inadequate." In a way, of course, I 
completely agree. I've tried to make it newbie friendly, but nobody
knows better than I that it still leaves some newbies behind. However, 
I have to ask why you didn't complain to me when you were having
problems with it. Without such feedback, there's not much chance of it 
getting fixed.

-Dave

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Matt Brown]

"John W. Lemons III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> The mind boggles at how important their work is that they are unable
> to help, yet they have plenty of time to post novella's about how
> busy they are and how lazy you are for not solving the problem
> without their help.

This shows just how much you misunderstand.

The people who know qmail are not mad at you and the people you're
defending because they're too busy, or anything like that.

It's the attitude that mailing lists like this are free resources that
can be exploited.  Places you can take from without giving.  

Get this through your head: NOTHING IS FREE.  Nobody is obligated to
help you for free.  Whining because nobody is willing to do your work
for you for no recompense is NOT appreciated.

Sure, nobody gets paid for giving advice here, but it doesn't mean
that it's for free.  The cost of being helped is that YOU have to do
most of the work.  If you don't like that fee structure, then go to
somebody you pay dollars for.

People will willingly volunteer their expertise, their knowledge; they
will NOT volunteer to do all the hard work for you.  Why do you expect
them to?

-Matt

-- 
| Matthew J. Brown - Senior Network Administrator - NBCi Shopping |
| 1983 W. 190th St, Suite 100, Torrance CA 90504  |
|  Phone: (310) 538-7122|  Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  |
|   Cell: (714) 457-1854|  Personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Dave Sill]

Warren Small <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I have not tried to install using LWQ but I couldn't
>help but notice some differences in the way things are installed using LWQ
>versus the INSTALL files. Now which is right? 

Question: Which of the following is the right way to remove a file
in the current directory named "-i":

  A. rm ./-i
  B. rm `pwd`/-i
  C. rm -i foo -i
  D. rm -- -i
  E. all of the above

Answer: E

-Dave

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Barley]

> The blind leading... C'mon, Jamin, you've had your 264 lines of fame. Now
> go away, will you? You're about to start a war you'll never understand.
> --
Man, this Robin character is nuts. Coder-superiority syndrome big time. Why
is it that tech geeks are so sure that their field of knowledge is the only
one that indicates general intelligence? If Robin is anything like his/her
mailing list personality in real life, I'm sure few people would consider
him/her nearly as intelligent as he/she considers him/herself. True
intelligence is indicated by a broader understanding of things, and the
contributions that many different people have to offer.

You mentioned Darwinism in a former post, Robin. How exactly is an angry
geek who knows a whole lot about electronic boxes, but less than nothing
about interacting successfully with the 5 billion other real-live people on
the planet suited for survival in a Darwinian sense? Something tells me if
you and I were dropped in the wilderness together, I'd be the one coming out
alive, if only because I had you skewered on a spit over a fire within the
first day. In fact it's hard to envision a role for you at all in any world
that wasn't utterly computer-dependant.

Try to remember that there are a lot of fields of knowledge and that your
sweeping name-calling, that people are "too fscking stupid" etc is utterly
absurd. For all you know the people you call "stupid" because they don't
know about qmail just invented the cure for cancer, or the 100 mpg car.

The carpenter who built your house. Your doctor. Your grandmother. Are they
all stupid too because they don't know about qmail?

Now why don't you go answer some questions instead of flaming me back. Show
us all how clever you are, Robin.

Gregg

> Robin S. Socha 
>

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Romeyn Prescott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 29 November 2000 at 12:24:08 
-0500

 > At 6:09 PM +0200 11/29/00, Milen Petrinski wrote:

 > >will anybody answer this question? I have the same problem :-( I'm trying to
 > >write a .qmail file, to allow to forward the messages to that user and to
 > >leave a copy in user's maildir.
 > >
 > >be-01:/home/vpopmail/domains/bates.eu.com/mpetrinski# more .qmail
 > >./Maildir/
 > >office
 > >
 > >As written in dot-qmail man page, this should work fine, but qmail
 > >interpretes the ./Maildir/ line as address, not es maildir path. Why?
 > >
 > >Milen

 > Try this:
 > 
 > ---
 > /path/to/home/Maildir/
 > &[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > ---

I was thinking along similar lines; but the dot-qmail manpage does
sasy that a maildir path begins with a dot or a slash, and it's the
maildir path that was failing.  Do you know this will fix it, or are
you just trying the obvious next thing?
-- 
David Dyer-Bennet  /  Welcome to the future!  /  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/  Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Kris Kelley]

> > How exactly is my MUA broken?
>
>   It isn't, the user is broken.  The user incorrectly decided that
> everyone would just love to see the full text of the original message
> (perhaps in case they inexplicably missed it the first time!), and that it
> needed no marking to make it clear to readers that it isn't new material.

Heh-heh, well, there's that, but there's also at least one technical gaffe
in the MUA he uses.  The same gaffe is in your MUA also, Mr. Owen.

While the RFCs don't say specifically one way or the other, the general rule
is that the subject in a reply should be prepended with "Re: " (case
sensitive), not "RE: ".  The latest IETF draft for message formats
(http://www.imc.org/draft-ietf-drums-msg-fmt) defines the rule a bit more
explicitly, saying that the subject MAY start with "Re: ".  Some versions of
Outlook and Outlook Express prepend "RE: ".  While I don't worry so much
about aesthetics, I believe that past discussion in this list indicated that
many MUA's that use "RE: " also don't supply the message history information
necessary to properly organize discussion threads in the qmail mailing list
archives.  As you have noticed, that makes some list subscribers quite
livid.

Corrections welcome.

---Kris Kelley

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Dave Sill]

Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>As for the statement you claim I made "the docs are all so bad because i
>couldn't install qmail with 
>them", I did not say this.  I simply stated that I was unsuccessfull in my
>attempts to install qmail using them.  I did not state they were bad, I even
>stated that I was sure they would be of help if I were to use them at my
>current point.  In short, I believe they may be a little lacking when it
>comes to helping someone completely new to qmail.  This may not be the case
>of all new users, but it is the case for at least a few.

You called the docs "highly inadequate", not "a little lacking when it
comes to helping someone completely new to qmail". In my book, calling 
something highly inadequate *is* calling it bad.

-Dave

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Alex Pennace]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 06:50:11PM +0200, Milen Petrinski wrote:
> Sorry, the previous was not complete, here it is:
> 
> Nov 29 15:53:17 be-01 qmail: 975513197.754397 new msg 101388
> Nov 29 15:53:17 be-01 qmail: 975513197.754867 info msg 101388: bytes 627
> from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 5060 uid 1001
> Nov 29 15:53:18 be-01 qmail: 975513198.117625 starting delivery 38: msg
> 101388 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Ok, qmail is going to deliver message 101388 to local address
bates.eu.com-mpetrinski.

> Nov 29 15:53:18 be-01 qmail: 975513198.118082 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
> Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.444056 new msg 101743
> Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.444555 info msg 101743: bytes 749
> from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 5149 uid 1011
> Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.444876 starting delivery 39: msg
> 101743 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Something messed up the local address here for this message.

> Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.445124 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
> Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.677352 new msg 102149
> Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.686915 info msg 102149: bytes 749
> from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 5157 uid 1011
> Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.702107 starting delivery 40: msg
> 102149 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.710230 status: local 3/10 remote 0/20

Ok, qmail is going to deliver message 102149 to local address
bates.eu.com-office.

> Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.988794 delivery 38: success:
> did_0+0+1/
> Nov 29 15:53:21 be-01 qmail: 975513201.997266 status: local 2/10 remote 0/20
> Nov 29 15:53:22 be-01 qmail: 975513202.005094 end msg 101388

Okay, message 101388 has been delivered to all recipients and has been
removed from the system (note that this message number may be reused
later). But if the .qmail for bates.eu.com-mpetrinski had any
forwarding lines the line "delivery xx: success" would include
something like "qp_3511" indicating that for forwarded mail
qmail-queue pid 3511 was invoked. But the qp_ note is missing here,
one can't be sure precisely where messages 101743 and 102149 came
from.

> Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.584003 delivery 39: success:
> POP_user_does_not_exist,_but_will_deliver_to_/home/vpopmail/do
> mains/bates.eu.com/postmaster/did_0+0+1/
> Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.584618 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
> Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.584919 end msg 101743
> Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.721129 delivery 40: success:
> did_0+0+1/
> Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.721590 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
> Nov 29 15:53:27 be-01 qmail: 975513207.721865 end msg 102149

Still insufficient information. Please post the output of:

1. /var/qmail/bin/qmail-showctl
2. cat /var/qmail/users/assign
3. /var/qmail/bin/qmail-getpw bates.eu.com-mpetrinski | xargs -0 echo
4. The .qmail file that governs deliveries for the local address
bates.eu.com-mpetrinski, if you can find it. When posting, be sure to
include the full path and filename of the .qmail file you are posting,
so we can double check to see if you got the right one.

 PGP signature

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Adam McKenna]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 08:47:25AM -0600, Jamin Collins wrote:
> I realize, as do most of the user's posting, that support here is provided
> by individuals donating their time of their own free will.  All I ask is
> that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help.

This suresh guy routinely (for the last few months or so) has been posting
newbie questions to the list, and providing no information whatsoever.  From
what I've seen, people have been ignoring him for the most part.  I suppose
someone just got tired of it.

--Adam

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Jamin Collins]

Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] writes:
> I'm not a big fan of newbie smackdowns, though a repeat 
> offendor might 
> warrant one. I think newbies generally respond better to reward than
> punishment. E.g., instead of:
> 
>   Your mailer is broken.
> 
> I'd say something like:
> 
>   Please don't include messages you're replying to as appendages to
>   your own messages. It's a waste of bytes, and it annoys many
>   people--most of whom are too polite and/or busy to bother
>   complaining. Instead, quote small passages, prefixing each line
>   with ">". This puts the relevant information right where it's
>   needed, and makes it easy for people to tell who said what.
> 
> The former approach *might* work, but is more likely to offend the
> newbie. The latter is polite and informative. An educated, unoffended
> newbie is much more likely to want to change his ways.

Thank you, and yes, the later would have been much better.

> >As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and 
> the installation
> >instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly 
> inadequate.
> 
> Ouch. "... LWQ ... [is] ... highly inadequate." In a way, of 
> course, I 
> completely agree. I've tried to make it newbie friendly, but nobody
> knows better than I that it still leaves some newbies behind.

Again thank you.
 
> However, 
> I have to ask why you didn't complain to me when you were having
> problems with it. Without such feedback, there's not much 
> chance of it 
> getting fixed.

I have every intention on supply statements to you once I have a completed
my installation.  As for why I didn't complain to you, I figured I would
look elsewhere for the information, rather than pestering the author with
questions.

Jamin W. Collins

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Jamin Collins]

Robin S. Socha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> * Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > How exactly is my MUA broken?  
> 
> * Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"

And which RFC does this violate?

> * No reference headers (*GREAT* for breaking archives)

I've checked RFC 822 and it would appear that this is an optional item.
Thus, an MUA is not "broken" for not having it.  Granted it might be nice
for the MUA to have this, but you can't have everything can you.

> * 6 attribution lines

Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC.  If it is,
which one?

> * No citation leader 

Once again. Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC.  If
it is, which one?

> * Trailing blank line

And yet again. Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC.
If it is, which one?

Unless I'm wrong it would appear that your complaints are all optional or
preferential items.  This being the case, the MUA is not broken.

 
> > I've included the original text of the message I've responded to.
> 
> How very useful.

Some would see it as such.

> > I've simply chosen not to add anything to the beginning of each line
> > of the original message.
> 
> Rather "I'm too fscking stupid to even find it among 2001 menues in
> Outlook", eh? 

And I see that we are back to name calling.  Again, how original.  I can see
that you don't like Outlook.  I don't much either, but there are reasons for
it (which have nothing to do with qmail so I won't bother listing them).
 
> > How does a request for common courtesy indicate a need for
> > professional help?
> 
> In general or in your particular case?

Since you asked, in general.
 
> > What brings me to post?  Simple, I like to help people learn more
> > about computing.  
> 
> The blind leading... C'mon, Jamin, you've had your 264 lines 
> of fame. Now
> go away, will you? You're about to start a war you'll never 
> understand.

And I see that once again you have resorted to name calling.  Just because
you may have more expertise (for whatever reason) on a topic than someone
else does not in any way mean that the other person is blind.  Additionally,
it does not ensure that the other person does not know more about some other
topic than you.

Jamin W. Collins

RE: creating an aliases.cdb without newaliases?

[Collin B. McClendon]

Yes, it was my fault...I didn't realize that they were dependent, I looked
in the fast forward directory and
found its own cdbmake. Thanks! I still can't send mail to root even if
.qmail-root is set to any other address..
wierd.
-Collin


-Original Message-
From: Alex Pennace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 2:26 PM
To: Collin B. McClendon
Cc: Qmail List (E-mail)
Subject: Re: creating an aliases.cdb without newaliases?


On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 10:46:04AM -0500, Collin B. McClendon wrote:
> I've looked and not found much so here goes:
> I have used newaliases on several systems, however it only creates an
> aliases.db.

The man page for newaliases indicates otherwise.
 
> Perhaps I'm overlooking something simple. I've gotten the cdb source, used
> cdbmake, doesn't
> seem compatible, cdbmake-12 does the same thing. I end up with a .cdb file
> however 
> printforward won't read it. 

cdbs are application dependant. A cdb for fastforward won't work for
tcpserver, for example.

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Peter Green]

[ Sorry to piggyback, but I ... misplaced ... the original post. ]

> Milen Petrinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > will anybody answer this question? I have the same problem :-( I'm trying to
> > write a .qmail file, to allow to forward the messages to that user and to
> > leave a copy in user's maildir.
> > 
> > be-01:/home/vpopmail/domains/bates.eu.com/mpetrinski# more .qmail
> > ./Maildir/
> > office

IIRC, vpopmail .qmail files in the user's directory do NOT support direct
delivery, nor do they support program execution. They only support
``forwarding''; if you want delivery or program execution, you will need to
set up a .qmail-user file, e.g.:

  # cat /home/vpopmail/domains/bates.eu.com/.qmail-mpetrinski
  ./mpetrinski/Maildir/
  office

(Though as Charles wrote, you probably don't want office, you want
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or something like that...)

HTH!
  
/pg
-- 
Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Microsoft is not the answer.
Microsoft is the question.
NO is the answer.

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Robin S. Socha]

* Greg Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>* Some other luser: 

>> How exactly is my MUA broken?

> It isn't, the user is broken.  

Indeed. Tell me, Jamin, does your inflatable sheep talk? If so, do you
wait for it to ask you for a fag, then repeat everything it said during
intercourse (including the funny noises your mother and the new neighbour
were making as well as the TV) and then ask if you were /really/ good?
More to the point: why do you not repeat everything that /your/ sheep said
but rather Suresh's (two weeks ago, while thumbing the Sear's catalogue)?
You don't? Then why do you behave this way on mailing lists,
i.e. full quote including signature and everything below your text?

> The user incorrectly decided that everyone would just love to see the
> full text of the original message (perhaps in case they inexplicably
> missed it the first time!), and that it needed no marking to make it
> clear to readers that it isn't new material.

The archives, man, the archives... No reference headers means no threads
means no archives. *sigh* Can we make this end?
-- 
Robin S. Socha 

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Barley]

Robin, you are decidedly an asshole.

I can't believe how abusive you feel the need to be. Must stem from some
geek-angst I don't understand. You feel like you're so bloody smart because
you spend most of your waking hours in front of a computer and can make
people who don't feel stupid. Well, some people would say you are a "luser"
(and it's loser, loser), and more importantly sad for only being able to
feel good about yourself by trashing on others.

IT-Darwinism? What a moron. You figured everything out on your own did you?
Born using bash? Never took a single lesson. I've never wanted to email a
punch in the face to someone more than to you. Your ego astounds me. I know
a LOT of people that would make you look REALLY stupid were you to have a
conversation with them. Try to remember that you aren't nearly as cool as
your qmail setup would indicate.

I can't believe the level to which this list has sunk. It's like the angry
neo-nazi geeks list now. And it used to be quite helpful. There are many of
us, newbies to qmail ourselves, who don't mind answering basic questions
within our ability. I try to do so when I know an answer. There's just no
point in being such an asshole. Post an answer or not at all, Robin. There
has to be a newsgroup whenre you and your geek friends can talk about how
stupid the rest of us are, but it isn't the qmail list.

And learn to spell, dipshit.

> Sometimes I wonder what brings people like you to posting this whining
> luser shit over and over and over again? This is not your new-age pink
> treehuggers society - this is a technical discussion list. IT-Darwinism,
> y'know? Survival of the brightest and, like, stuff. Huh-huh.
> --
> Robin S. Socha
> Enhanced for MSIE 5.5: 
>

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Barley]

I want to second what was said here. The manuals are often inadequate for
newbies. I never would have gotten qmail set up without the patient and
generous help of those on this list. Thanks to everyone who helped me! I'm
sure glad I wasn't raked over the coals like some of the recent posters.

To Mr. Brauer, who seems on a quest to post nothing but flames here, we
realize that no one is paid staff here. But you flaming everyone who posts
doesn't help a thing. No one is getting paid to sift through your angry
posts, either. If you don't have something helpful to say, don't say a damn
thing. Even if the original poster WAS wasting list bandwidth, you only
waste more telling him not to, and then we all waste bandwidth on threads
like this. It has been a real bummer to watch you trashing on newbies, as I
am sure you will trash on me for this. Remember that these people you insult
are probably a LOT better at some stuff than you are, and don't need to be
treated like imbeciles because they don't know about qmail. Typical angry
geek syndrome. No one is smart unless they know what you know. I'll remember
to flame the hell out of you if you ever post questions in my fields of
expertise on other newsgroups.

Gregg

> I may be out of line here.  However, this is not the first time I've seen
> snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help.
I
> am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent.
>
> Sure, some of the postings for help may not contain all the information
that
> a more experienced person would have.  But to respond to them with a
> statement to the effect of "send all necessary information" is crazy.
There
> is a certain level of experience necessary to know what may or may not be
> needed to diagnose a problem.  As many of the people posting without this
> level of information are new to either Linux or qmail (or both) there
needs
> to be some understanding on everyone's behalf.  And telling someone to
RTFM
> is normally of little to no help.  I've been told several times to RTFM
> without any indication as to which manual.  This is of little to no help
to
> anyone.
>
> As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the
installation
> instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate.  I
> tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the source
> twice, with no luck.  Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck.  It
> wasn't until I purchased "Running qmail." that I actually got the thing to
> work.  I'm sure that if I went back to either set of instructions (source
or
> LWQ) that both would be adequate for the installation now that I've done
it
> before.  However herein lies the problem.  The documentation that
currently
> exists is really only helpful to someone that has already installed the
> software once before.  But, I've digressed.
>
> IMHO, everyone that is offering help via a list such as this should be
> courteous to those asking for help.  If you can't be courteous, I ask that
> you please refrain from posting.  Snapping at a user asking for help will
> accomplish nothing more than making the user angry and hesitant from
posting
> in the future.  IIRC, these are not the goals of this list or any other
> support list.
>
> I realize, as do most of the user's posting, that support here is provided
> by individuals donating their time of their own free will.  All I ask is
> that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help.
>
> Jamin W. Collins
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 3:11 AM
> To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Newbie question
>
>
> Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 15:11 schrieb suresh:
>
> Suresh, for first writing such nonsens to the list and asking me for help
> off
> list does not fit together. before asking other busy people for help (it
is
> no paid support staff here, we all have our work to do!), you should
>
> -have read the docs at least twice
> -checked if you fulfilled the requirements for qmail-ldap, both on you
> installation and youself (yes, the wonderfull sentence "you should have
> fairly good knowledge of qmail and ldap..." and so on in bold letters
aside
> to the dowload link on the wepages
> -if you ask a question, provide all necessary information, in general as
> much
> as possible. At least OS, versions (including patch version), _complete_
> logs, configuration
> -checked all logs yourself, including ldap logs, set loglevel to highest
> possible value - helps a lot
>
>
> > PLEASE DO NOT READ NEWBIE QUESTION IF WANT TO USE THOSE DEROGATORY
> > STATEMENTS .YU DONT EVEN HELP EITHER .I AM SURE THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE
WHO
> > WOULD LIKE TO HELP!
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 6:55 AM
> > To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch
> > Subj

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Matt Brown]

Greg, he's not calling people stupid for what they don't know, but for
what they couldn't be bothered to try, for the effort they couldn't be
bothered to expend when it's just so easy to try and get someone else
to do the hard work.

-Matt

-- 
| Matthew J. Brown - Senior Network Administrator - NBCi Shopping |
| 1983 W. 190th St, Suite 100, Torrance CA 90504  |
|  Phone: (310) 538-7122|  Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  |
|   Cell: (714) 457-1854|  Personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Barley]

> Greg, he's not calling people stupid for what they don't know, but for
> what they couldn't be bothered to try, for the effort they couldn't be
> bothered to expend when it's just so easy to try and get someone else
> to do the hard work.
>
> -Matt

Matt,

I dig. You folks who have done a lot of hard work and are knowledgable
should not have to do the work for newbies who can't be bothered. But the
easiest way to avoid exerting any effort on their behalf seems to me to be
to ignore them. This Robin person just seems to need to take out his/her
dissatisfaction with life on newbies on this list, some of whom seem to have
made efforts to solve problems themselves.

I must say that my personal experience with this list has always been
extremely helpful and I can't say enough how much I value those of you who
have helped me. I certainly do my best to read the docs and solve problems
myself before posting, so maybe that's all it is. I just think it's crappy
to have to read full-on verbal abuse, personal attacks, and sweeping
name-calling. This Robin person has NO IDEA who he/she is really talking to,
only that they don't know as much about qmail. This is no reason to call
someone "too fscking stupid". I wish people would simply choose not to reply
to questions they consider a waste of their time.

Gregg

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Tim Hunter]

(excuse my outlook 2000)

> -Original Message-
> From: Jamin Collins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 9:47 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
>
>
> I may be out of line here.  However, this is not the first time I've seen
> snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking
> for help.  I
> am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent.

I will agree that there are snappy rude responses on this list, many other
lists too that are only around to provide free support of a product that is
wonderful in many aspects.

>
> Sure, some of the postings for help may not contain all the
> information that
> a more experienced person would have.  But to respond to them with a
> statement to the effect of "send all necessary information" is
> crazy.  There
> is a certain level of experience necessary to know what may or may not be
> needed to diagnose a problem.  As many of the people posting without this
> level of information are new to either Linux or qmail (or both)
> there needs
> to be some understanding on everyone's behalf.  And telling
> someone to RTFM
> is normally of little to no help.  I've been told several times to RTFM
> without any indication as to which manual.  This is of little to
> no help to
> anyone.

A good start would be the documentation included or www.qmail.org/top.html
or the FAQs there.  Commonly we point people to LWQ or something similar.

>
> As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the
> installation
> instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate.  I
> tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the source
> twice, with no luck.  Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck.  It
> wasn't until I purchased "Running qmail." that I actually got the thing to
> work.  I'm sure that if I went back to either set of instructions
> (source or
> LWQ) that both would be adequate for the installation now that
> I've done it
> before.  However herein lies the problem.  The documentation that
> currently
> exists is really only helpful to someone that has already installed the
> software once before.  But, I've digressed.
>

First time I installed qmail was over 3 years ago, no LWQ and only the
install instructions, I was a fairly unix newbie with no professional
experience and only 1 year personal experience.  I installed it perfectly
even with procmail and fastforward to keep sendmail aliases and delivery.
I eventually read LWQ and completely reworked my install, I have since
pointed this source to many newbie friends who want to setup a mailserver
and have hardly needed to answer questions, much less trivial questions.
Some of the questions to this list could be solved with google.com and are
very typical of the new linux generation.

> IMHO, everyone that is offering help via a list such as this should be
> courteous to those asking for help.  If you can't be courteous, I ask that
> you please refrain from posting.  Snapping at a user asking for help will
> accomplish nothing more than making the user angry and hesitant
> from posting
> in the future.  IIRC, these are not the goals of this list or any other
> support list.
>

The goals of this list IMHO is not to answer FAQ's or help with learning
common unix tasks, there are far to many resources to cover here.
Snapping at a user should make them hesitant to post, maybe then will they
at least attempt to search for the correct information.

> I realize, as do most of the user's posting, that support here is provided
> by individuals donating their time of their own free will.  All I ask is
> that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help.
>

We ask the same, I have over 100 messages just from this list, I consider
about 1/3 of them actually attempted to make efforts to find out from their
own accord what they needed.  How much time do you think people on this list
need to allocate to read 60+ unnecessary emails?

> Jamin W. Collins
>
> -Original Message-


-- Tim Hunter

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Markus Stumpf]

Ok, I have read the whole thread now. We had that before and we will
have that in the future.

As for the experience needed to set up qmail:
  I have recommended qmail to some 5-10 people with different
  experiences. Some never set up a mail server but have some Unix
  experience, some were new to Unix.
  I told them where to get qmail and LWQ, read the INSTALL and LWQ
  and they all managed to set up qmail without any bigger problems, some
  even without ANY problems. Some of them run qmail with 10-50 virtual
  domains and and some 100 POP accounts.
  So I don't think it is too complicated to set up and run qmail if one
  really seriously tries.

As for the hostility of this list:
  It's now about three years that I've posted my "Xmas story" to this list.
  I'd written it in a similar thread and I think it's still true.
  You can read either at
  http://www.lamer.de/maex/creative/articles/xmasstory/
  or in the list archive
  http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1997/12/msg00816.html

\Maex

-- 
SpaceNet GmbH |   http://www.Space.Net/   | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 |  Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0| realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen  |  Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299  | fallen asleep yet.

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Romeyn Prescott]

>
>  > Try this:
>  >
>  > ---
>  > /path/to/home/Maildir/
>  > &[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  > ---

Sorry.  It's been a day.  I meant to say that I tried this with 
success on my server.  It worked for me.

...ROMeyn
-- 


signat-url: http://www2.potsdam.edu/dctm/prescor/signat-url.htm
cubiclecam: http://digirom.potsdam.edu/~prescor/cubiclecam.html
^^^ <--- Off-line unless someone knows how to get camserv to
 compile under RedHat 7...  *sigh*  :-(

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Markus Stumpf]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 10:10:56AM -0600, Jamin Collins wrote:
> If you see the questions of users on this list as bothersome, I'm sorry.
> However, as membership to the list is voluntary, you are not being forced to
> read them.  In short, if you don't like them, don't read them.  

Sure, or don't answer them and get 10 eMails followed shortly after like
   "I still have the problem and no one helps me. This list is sooo unpolite"

\Maex

-- 
SpaceNet GmbH |   http://www.Space.Net/   | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 |  Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0| realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen  |  Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299  | fallen asleep yet.

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 29 November 2000 at 13:32:36 -0500
 > Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 > 
 > >I may be out of line here.  However, this is not the first time I've seen
 > >snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help.  I
 > >am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent.
 > 
 > I'm not a big fan of newbie smackdowns, though a repeat offendor might 
 > warrant one. I think newbies generally respond better to reward than
 > punishment. 

I think this has been pretty well established in animal training,
child psychology, and behavioral psych circles for some time now, for
essentially all animals, not just newbies.
-- 
David Dyer-Bennet  /  Welcome to the future!  /  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/  Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 29 November 2000 at 10:10:56 -0600
 > How exactly is my MUA broken?
 > 
 > I've included the original text of the message I've responded to.  I've
 > simply chosen not to add anything to the beginning of each line of the
 > original message.

Well, you're sending in a system-specific character set that I can
only access with some difficulty (saving to a file and then treating
as straight ASCII, which loses me any unusual characters in the
text). 

And not following standard quoting conventions is a big problem; lots
of us use software that depends on those conventions to properly
present your message, and to properly manipulate it.

Finally, I do sometimes find people overly snappish responding here.
I try to avoid doing so myself, despite feeling the urge sometimes.
It seems to me that we often encounter people who aren't knowledgable
enough to be doing a Unix sysadmin's job, who are trying to set up
their own mail server.  Some of us resent doing sysadmin 101 training
more than others of us.

As to the qmail documentation; I'm *not* a professional Unix sysadmin,
though I've been in charge of a SunOS system or two in my professional
life.  Most of my admin experience is on my own Linux boxes.  But I
installed early versions of qmail and got them working from the
instructions Dan sent with them (the various external documentation
hadn't appeared yet) with very little trouble.  You just have to read
what they say, and pay attention.  There isn't a lot of redundancy,
and they're written for people who understand Unix.  But I'd say
they're reasonably good; not "inadequate".  Add in the external
sources such as LWQ, and I'd say the doc is better than any other Unix
package I've installed.

As to "which is right" when the various docs differ -- guess what?
There isn't an official "right" handed down from on high.  Qmail
conforms to the Unix philosophy, and should be best regarded as a mail
transfer toolkit.  You get to use that toolkit to set up the mail
transfer you want to happen.
-- 
David Dyer-Bennet  /  Welcome to the future!  /  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/  Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Markus Stumpf]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 10:36:32AM -0800, Barley wrote:
> True
> intelligence is indicated by a broader understanding of things, and the
> contributions that many different people have to offer.

So ... this says that all those that cannot describe their problems
properly are idiots, because they are lacking the broader understanding of
the problems they have and thus are unable to ask the right questions.

Where's the difference between what Robin said and what you say?

\Maex

-- 
SpaceNet GmbH |   http://www.Space.Net/   | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 |  Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0| realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen  |  Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299  | fallen asleep yet.

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Bill Carlson]

On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Barley wrote:

>
> > The blind leading... C'mon, Jamin, you've had your 264 lines of fame. Now
> > go away, will you? You're about to start a war you'll never understand.
> > --
> Man, this Robin character is nuts. Coder-superiority syndrome big time. Why

Damn, I forgot to bring any marshmellows with me today!

Hmmm, marshmellows.


Bill Carlson
-- 
Systems Programmer[EMAIL PROTECTED]|  Opinions are mine,
Virtual Hospital  http://www.vh.org/|  not my employer's.
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics|

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Jamin Collins]

Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> You called the docs "highly inadequate", not "a little lacking when it
> comes to helping someone completely new to qmail". In my 
> book, calling 
> something highly inadequate *is* calling it bad.

Now, we are getting into a matter of semantics.  It was not my intention to
say the documentation was bad.  I would say that your documentation is
actually, better than what comes with qmail.  However, I do still see it as
lacking where a new user is concerned.

Jamin W. Collins

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Robin S. Socha]

* Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I think newbies generally respond better to reward than punishment. E.g.,
> instead of:

>   Your mailer is broken.

> I'd say something like:

>   Please don't include messages you're replying to as appendages to
>   your own messages. It's a waste of bytes, and it annoys many
>   people--most of whom are too polite and/or busy to bother
>   complaining. Instead, quote small passages, prefixing each line with
>   ">". This puts the relevant information right where it's needed, and
>   makes it easy for people to tell who said what.

1. This is the most basic netiquette. Last time I checked, this list was
   not ?

2. Been there, done that. I still don't like the "fuck off, geek"
   t-shirt I got.

3. If this is a technical discussion list, clean and easily accessible
   archival of information is paramount. Want me to count the "possible
   followup"s and broken threads caused by missing reference headers?

> The former approach *might* work, but is more likely to offend the
> newbie. The latter is polite and informative. An educated, unoffended
> newbie is much more likely to want to change his ways.

That might have been true in 1994 (when I trimmed by beautifully crafted
2-screen signature back to 4 lines after being flamed by 99% of that
mailinglist). But this is the 00's. You cannot tell people to "fix their
MIME settings" or use another MUA because they are so damned dense they
believe that the internet comes with their Windos-CD and Outlook is
configured correctly out-of-the-box.

I don't mind helping, but I also don't mind giving back to the net
what the net gave to me: rough justice. We're talking about an MTA, a
tool which, if used by lackwits, is quite likely to wreak havoc on
unsuspecting admins. Maybe a "qmail-newbies"-list might be warranted?
-- 
Robin S. Socha 

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Barley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 29 November 2000 at 10:36:32 -0800

 > Try to remember that there are a lot of fields of knowledge and that your
 > sweeping name-calling, that people are "too fscking stupid" etc is utterly
 > absurd. For all you know the people you call "stupid" because they don't
 > know about qmail just invented the cure for cancer, or the 100 mpg car.
 > 
 > The carpenter who built your house. Your doctor. Your grandmother. Are they
 > all stupid too because they don't know about qmail?

Then again, it's also true that a lot of doctors, and often good
doctors, kill themselves flying airplanes.  It's widely believed that
the reason so many do it is the combination of 1) being able to afford
higher-performance airplanes than most private pilots, and 2) being
unable to conceive of being as ignorant about anything as they, in
fact, are about flying.

I'd have to say that when a doctor kills himself in an airplane that's
really more than he can handle, in conditions he's really not up to
flying in, that it's a stupid mistake.  It could have been avoided by
a more realistic assessment of his own capabilities.

Now, luckily, even our most aggressive flamers are not good enough
that anybody's life is at stake here.  (And I hope there aren't many
places where email systems are life-critical, either).  But some of
the principle remains.  When you're in so far over your head that you
not only can't see daylight, but can't even tell which way the surface
is, you've probably done something stupid to get yourself there.  No
matter how "smart" you may seem to be in other contexts.

Not many people actually need to run their own MTAs.  Setting up
qmail, in particular (the only one I know well), requires making a lot
of decisions about how you want to do things, and then implementing
them.  Both parts of that are difficult or impossible if you don't
know anything about being a Unix sysadmin.  The same flexibility that
makes it adaptable to so many different situations also makes it hard
to write a cookbook for.

My impression here is that people are very willing to help people who
don't understand qmail well, and even people who make the occasional
stupid mistake (as we all do), so long as they show a minimal
competence in the Unix environment (including configuration debugging)
and some ability and willingness to do their research.  And sometimes
will help even without those things.

At the same time, we have our share of people who are so frustrated at
the continual string of people needing really basic help, stuff any
vaguely competent sysadmin should be able to figure out for themselves
95% of the time, parading through here that they sometimes lash out.
A number of people on the net, some of them here, seem to have decided
that the disparity of numbers is so large that only full frontal
assault gives them a chance to survive.  I don't happen to agree with
them; on the other hand, I'll be a lot of newbies come to understand
the situation much better through reading threads like this one, which
wouldn't happen without all three groups present.
-- 
David Dyer-Bennet  /  Welcome to the future!  /  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/  Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Jamin Collins]

Markus Stumpf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Sure, or don't answer them and get 10 eMails followed shortly 
> after like
>"I still have the problem and no one helps me. This list 
> is sooo unpolite"

I'm not saying that some of the user's are rude, or that they do not post
statements like the above.  Does this however mean that because there are
some people out there that it is alright to berate newbies before they have
done so?  IMHO no.

Jamin W. Collins

Newbie Question

[Louis Mushandu]

Dear All,

Fits qmail installation and all was fine until I tried to send email to the
box.   It produces the following error message

This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sorry. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host,
it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6)

I have done rtfm bit, hones,t but now I seem to be going round in circles.

I am using ./Maildir/

/var/qmail/rc

#!/bin/sh
# Using splogger to send the log through syslog.
# Using qmail-local to deliver messages to Maildir format by default.   

exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
qmail-start ./Maildir/ splogger qmail &  

and below is control details

/var/qmail/control

::
bouncefrom
::
postmaster
::
concurrencyincoming
::
20
::
defaultdomain
::
.wonder.com
::
locals
::
mail.wonder.com:mcuser01
wonder.com
::
me
::
mail.wonder.com
::
plusdomain
::
wonder.com
::
rcpthosts
::
mail.wonder.com
::
virtualdomains
::
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



Thanks in advance.

Using this list for QMail Support questions...

[John W. Lemons III]

>From Dan's own page:

"But please don't send me email of the following types:
qmail support questions. Send them to the qmail mailing list instead. "

Kinda blows that "this isn't a support mailing list" idea out of the water,
eh?

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[Charles Cazabon]

Peter Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> IIRC, vpopmail .qmail files in the user's directory do NOT support direct
> delivery, nor do they support program execution. They only support
> ``forwarding'';

Ah, hence the original user's log of attempted deliveries to 
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" .  Shall we consider this issue closed now?  :)
Having never used vpopmail, I was unaware of this restriction on .qmail files.
Perhaps if they don't behave like other .qmail files, they should have
another name (.vpopmail comes to mind).

Frankenmail, indeed.

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.
---

[HELP] Domain in Sender: is missing

[montgomery f. tidwell]

Howdy,

i just noticed that mail sent out by my qmail server does
not put my domain in to the Sender: field. it is going
out as "Sender: mtidwell" and not "Sender:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
like it should.

what have i done wrong??


TIA


  \\//_

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Peter Green]

* Barley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001129 15:14]:
>   Well, some people would say you are a "luser"
> (and it's loser, loser)

Um, no. ``luser'' stands for ``local user'' originally. Of course, it's
taken on something of a double entendre to describe the more clue-deprived
of the bunch.

> IT-Darwinism? What a moron. You figured everything out on your own did you?

Probably not. However, the questions I've been Robin ask on mailing lists
(and there have been some pretty stupid oversights! ;) have been fairly full
of description, log entries, command lines he tried, &c. And lo and behold!
he got a helpful, polite response every single time!

(BTW, I just assume Robin is a guy. (Sorry if I offend, Robin.) In my little
sheltered world, I like to think women aren't as foul-mouthed as he is. ;)

> Born using bash? Never took a single lesson. I've never wanted to email a
> punch in the face to someone more than to you. Your ego astounds me. I know
> a LOT of people that would make you look REALLY stupid were you to have a
> conversation with them. Try to remember that you aren't nearly as cool as
> your qmail setup would indicate.

Incidentally, I have seen Robin ask questions re: qmail and addons on other
mailing lists. He isn't perfect (horrors!). However, he is always fairly
thorough in his question-asking. I think therein lies his (and others')
frustration: people frequently come in *demanding* (not asking for) help,
not posting any real details about their environment, and get all freaky
when someone tells them, basically, ``We can't help you if you don't post
details.'' Yeah, that's what it boils down to.

> I can't believe the level to which this list has sunk. It's like the angry
> neo-nazi geeks list now. And it used to be quite helpful. There are many of
> us, newbies to qmail ourselves, who don't mind answering basic questions
> within our ability. I try to do so when I know an answer.

I'm being dead serious here: unsubscribe. Or create your own list. I don't
find Robin obnoxious (well, not *overly* so). Y'know why? Because I don't
give a crap what he writes. *They're* *just* *words*. There are plenty of
people on the list who help (of which Robin is one), but neither this list
*nor* *qmail* is for the faint-hearted.

About the ``neo-nazi'' [sic] attitude toward things like quoting text, line
wrapping, and whatnot, it's probably a reaction toward people using tools
they have no idea how to use (i.e., mail clients). Yeah it's a little
elitest, but some of us (apparently yourself included, mostly) have invested
a good deal of time in understanding netiquette (forget RFCs). We appreciate
when people follow commonly-accepted standards and get upset (at one level
or another) when people knowingly or unknowingly break those ``standards''.
It's really not that big of a deal to me...however, to be the best ``net
neighbor'' (gag!) people should really do a better job of trying to adhere
to those long-standing practices.

Or not. Whatever.

/pg
-- 
Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
(Seen somewhere on the net.)

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Peter Green]

* Barley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001129 15:38]:
> I dig. You folks who have done a lot of hard work and are knowledgable
> should not have to do the work for newbies who can't be bothered. But the
> easiest way to avoid exerting any effort on their behalf seems to me to be
> to ignore them. This Robin person just seems to need to take out his/her
> dissatisfaction with life on newbies on this list, some of whom seem to have
> made efforts to solve problems themselves.

heh, have you ever read any of djb's responses to those he doesn't feel are
putting forth enough effort? It's about par for the list... :)

> I just think it's crappy
> to have to read full-on verbal abuse, personal attacks, and sweeping
> name-calling. This Robin person has NO IDEA who he/she is really talking to,
> only that they don't know as much about qmail. This is no reason to call
> someone "too fscking stupid". I wish people would simply choose not to reply
> to questions they consider a waste of their time.

Doesn't Outlook have filtering capabilities? Perhaps you could figure out
how to just filter mail from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> into the bit bucket; that
should basically take care of the problem, eh?

/pg
-- 
Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
If you go to a costume party at your boss's house, wouldn't you think a good 
costume would be to dress up like the boss's wife? Trust me, it's not.
 (Jack Handey)

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Louis Theran]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jamin Collins) writes:


> As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the
> installation instructions with qmail itself are for the most part
> highly inadequate.  I tried setting qmail up just from the
> instructions included with the source twice, with no luck.
> Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck.  It wasn't until I
> purchased "Running qmail." that I actually got the thing to work.
> I'm sure that if I went back to either set of instructions (source
> or LWQ) that both would be adequate for the installation now that
> I've done it before.  However herein lies the problem.  The
> documentation that currently exists is really only helpful to
> someone that has already installed the software once before.  But,
> I've digressed.

Really?  Is this a digression because you've already contacted LWQ's
author with suggestions?  Have you posted anything to this list about
the specific problems you had with INSTALL?

If you think that new users aren't well served by the available
documentation, then you should contribute.  Somebody else wrote qmail
for you.  Somebody else wrote LWQ for you.  You've even gotten help
from the qmail list.

Complaining about other posters won't help any new users.  If that's
what you actually care about, try fixing the ``inadequate''
instructions.

^L

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Romeyn Prescott]

At 10:01 AM -0800 11/29/00, Barley wrote:
>I want to second what was said here. The manuals are often inadequate for
>newbies. I never would have gotten qmail set up without the patient and
>generous help of those on this list. Thanks to everyone who helped me! I'm
>sure glad I wasn't raked over the coals like some of the recent posters.

At the risk of seeming to be on the side of the geek-elitist ilk on 
this list, I would like to say that while they don't go out of their 
way to say as such, the docs (both provided and those by other 
parties as listed on qmail.org) DO assume a certain level of 
knowledge about Linux/Unix as a whole, without which you undoubtedly 
will get lost.

I'm not exactly a Linux newbie, but I'm far from an 
expert/administrator.  I'm in that "knows enough to be dangerous" 
category.  :-)

In my self-studies of Linux I have come across lots of reading 
material.  Not a lot of it sticks with me, but I do so love the 
following quote and I think it says rather nicely what some of the 
dinks here don't seem to be able to articulate:

--
  Any system reference will require you to read it at least three 
times before you get a reasonable picture of what to do.  If you need 
to read it more than three times, then there is probably some other 
information that you really should be reading first.  If you are only 
reading a document once, then you are being too impatient with 
yourself.
  It is very important to identify the exact terms that you fail 
to understand in a document.  Always try to back-trace to the precise 
word before you continue.
  It is usually cheaper and faster to read a document three times 
than to pay someone to train you.  Don't be lazy.
  Don't learn new things according to deadlines.  Your Unix 
knowledge is going to evolve by grace and fascination, not by 
pressure.
--

I really love that.  (It's from RUTE User Tutorial and Exposition, 
available somewhere at linuxdoc.org.)  It is good advice that a good 
friend of mine is constantly drilling me with.  You won't learn 
anything if other people are always giving you the answers.

I installed qmail myself.  Without help from this list or anyone 
else.  But it was NOT easy (for me).  I read the docs.  All of them. 
Then I read them again.  Then I started.  And I STILL made mistakes. 
I read again.  I gradually found and corrected all my mistakes.  Now 
it works.  Yay for me.  But it was a lot of WORK.

But given that this was a scant two weeks ago, I'm deeply sympathetic 
to others experiencing the problems I had.  Maybe in a few 
weeks/months after tweaking and sitting on a happy system I'll turn 
into yet another callous asshole with better things to do with my 
life.  If I do, someone smack me.

Don't hate me for using the word "dink," :-D
...ROMeyn
-- 


signat-url: http://www2.potsdam.edu/dctm/prescor/signat-url.htm
cubiclecam: http://digirom.potsdam.edu/~prescor/cubiclecam.html
^^^ <--- Off-line unless someone knows how to get camserv to
 compile under RedHat 7...  *sigh*  :-(

my Sender field is incorrect.

[Montgomery Tidwell]

Title: 



Howdy,i just noticed that the Sender field in all of my 
outgoing mail is incorrect. it issending "Sender: mtidwell" and s/b "Sender: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]".what have i done 
wrong??TIA 
\\//_

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Jamin Collins]

Markus Stumpf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:

On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 10:36:32AM -0800, Barley wrote:
> > True
> > intelligence is indicated by a broader understanding of 
> things, and the
> > contributions that many different people have to offer.
> 
> So ... this says that all those that cannot describe their problems
> properly are idiots, because they are lacking the broader 
> understanding of
> the problems they have and thus are unable to ask the right questions.
> 
> Where's the difference between what Robin said and what you say?
> 

The difference is that Robin seems to take the stance that if you are not a
Linux or Unix GOD then you are an idiot.  Barley on the other hand indicates
that one can be intelligent and yet not know anyone about a given area.

Jamin W. Collins

why didn't it send my msg?

[QBA]

Hi,

I have a problem and can't understand its source. I hope you can
help me solve it. And here's the point: I have a dial-up connection
to my isp so I can't have my own official domain name. But I have
joined dyndns.org project and registered there as qbaroot.dyndns.org.
I've also downloaded a ddup program and now I start it everytime
I connect to internet (it happens automaticaly 'cause I added
this program to /etc/ppp/ip-up.local). And while being online if I type 
"www.qbaroot.dyndns.org" in my webbrowser I can see my websites.
And this is cool. But today I wanted to check if when I send a message
(while online) to [EMAIL PROTECTED] it will come directly to my
mailbox. Unfortunately it didn't. And I don't know why. I must add
that after I got my own domain name on dyndns.org I've changed some
qmail's configuration files (to be precise I changed 3 files from
/var/qmail/control directory: defaultdomain, defaulthost and me.
Instead of "localhost.localdomain" I put there "qbaroot.dyndns.org".
I had to do so 'cause some pop3 servers rejected my all e-mails.) 
As a attachment I send my last maillog when I was trying to send a msg
(hope it will be useful). I'd like to know why it didn't work and
what to do to make it working. 
Thank you all 4 help,

QBA



 


Nov 29 22:00:13 localhost qmail: 975531613.680894 new msg 28139
Nov 29 22:00:13 localhost qmail: 975531613.681071 info msg 28139: bytes 444 from 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 1309 uid 501
Nov 29 22:00:13 localhost qmail: 975531613.738866 starting delivery 2: msg 28139 to 
remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nov 29 22:00:13 localhost qmail: 975531613.738959 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20
Nov 29 22:00:15 localhost qmail: 975531615.261675 delivery 2: deferral: 
Sorry,_I_wasn't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1)/

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Barley]

> "lusers" is a derogatory way to refer to system users by system
administrators.

Isn't it great the way English expands in this flexible way? ;)

OK, so the people Robin likes to flame ARE "lusers"...my bad... whereas
Robin him or herself is actually still a "loser" in the conventional sense.

Homonyms...what fun.

>
> It really is spelled that way in common usage, though I doubt you will
find
> it in a dictionary.
>

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Mark Delany]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:53:40PM -0600, Jamin Collins wrote:
> Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > You called the docs "highly inadequate", not "a little lacking when it
> > comes to helping someone completely new to qmail". In my 
> > book, calling 
> > something highly inadequate *is* calling it bad.
> 
> Now, we are getting into a matter of semantics.  It was not my intention to
> say the documentation was bad.  I would say that your documentation is
> actually, better than what comes with qmail.  However, I do still see it as
> lacking where a new user is concerned.

So what did Dave think of your feedback and suggestions?  You did
contacted Dave with suggested material to fill the "lacking" parts as
soon as you could, right?

This list hears a lot of people suggest that documentation doesn't
support new users sufficiently, but when the list suggests that the
complainant is absolutely the best person to provide feedback to the
document authors (as their experience is fresh and relevant), the
response to the above question is near universal silence or a lame
excuse as to why they haven't yet but will do so Real Soon Now.

In short, most complainants complaint, few do anything to fix it for
the next new user who comes along. Complaints have much better
credibility if they act to fix things where they can.


Regards.

FW: Newbie Question

[Louis Mushandu]

> Dear All,
> 
> Fits qmail installation and all was fine until I tried to send email to
> the box.   It produces the following error message
> 
> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
> 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sorry. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host,
> it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6)
> 
> I have done rtfm bit, hones,t but now I seem to be going round in circles.
> 
> I am using ./Maildir/
> 
> /var/qmail/rc
> 
> #!/bin/sh
> # Using splogger to send the log through syslog.
> # Using qmail-local to deliver messages to Maildir format by default.   
> 
> exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
> qmail-start ./Maildir/ splogger qmail &  
> 
> and below is control details
> 
> /var/qmail/control
> 
> ::
> bouncefrom
> ::
> postmaster
> ::
> concurrencyincoming
> ::
> 20
> ::
> defaultdomain
> ::
> .wonder.com
> ::
> locals
> ::
> mail.wonder.com:mcuser01
> wonder.com
> ::
> me
> ::
> mail.wonder.com
> ::
> plusdomain
> ::
> wonder.com
> ::
> rcpthosts
> ::
> mail.wonder.com
> ::
> virtualdomains
> ::
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance.

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Adam McKenna]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 11:15:04AM -0800, Barley wrote:
> > Greg, he's not calling people stupid for what they don't know, but for
> > what they couldn't be bothered to try, for the effort they couldn't be
> > bothered to expend when it's just so easy to try and get someone else
> > to do the hard work.
> 
> Matt,
> 
> I dig. You folks who have done a lot of hard work and are knowledgable
> should not have to do the work for newbies who can't be bothered. But the
> easiest way to avoid exerting any effort on their behalf seems to me to be
> to ignore them. This Robin person just seems to need to take out his/her
> dissatisfaction with life on newbies on this list, some of whom seem to have
> made efforts to solve problems themselves.

While I agree that Robin is overly caustic at some times, I do for the most
part find his posts pretty funny, and I think (or hope) that that is what he
intends.

That being said, there are also some situations where overt abuse is the only
way to get something across to someone , and I'm happy that Robin is here to 
provide it.

--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_
  4:58pm  up 172 days, 15:15, 10 users,  load average: 0.08, 0.03, 0.01

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Barley]

> Maybe a "qmail-newbies"-list might be warranted?

Here here. Then those who don't mind newbie level questions can answer those
and others can ignore the list entirely. I think qmail-newbies list is a
great idea.

> --
> Robin S. Socha 
>

Re: Newbie Question

[Bill Carlson]

On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Louis Mushandu wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Fits qmail installation and all was fine until I tried to send email to the
> box.   It produces the following error message
>
> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sorry. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host,
> it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6)

  ^

You need mail.mongrel.com listed in /var/qmail/control/locals, from the
info you provided it isn't in that file.


HTH,

Bill Carlson
-- 
Systems Programmer[EMAIL PROTECTED]|  Opinions are mine,
Virtual Hospital  http://www.vh.org/|  not my employer's.
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics|

Re: Newbie Question

[Amitai Schlair]

on 11/29/00 3:17 PM, Louis Mushandu at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
> 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sorry. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host,
> it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6)

[...]

> locals
> ::
> mail.wonder.com:mcuser01
> wonder.com

qmail has told you exactly what the problem is. Would you prefer a less
helpful error message? :-p

You might want mongrel.com to be in control/virtualdomains instead, though.

- Amitai

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[asantos]

From: Barley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Robin, you are decidedly an asshole.
>
>I can't believe how abusive you feel the need to be. Must stem from some
>geek-angst I don't understand. You feel like you're so bloody smart because


Robin's no geek. He's just a kid, and fairly ignorant at that. For example,
nobody told him that there is no such thing as HTML "programming", as he is
proud to include in his http://socha.net/professional.english.html page. Or
that XEmacs is not an operating system. For that matter, he doesn't even
know that there is no operating system named Dos, nor Dos95 nor Dos NT.

For someone with such a doubtfull sense of humour as he shows to have
welcoming IE users the way he does at http://socha.net/, he seems to be
inordinately proud of listing among his "computer skills" Microsoft Office.

Therefore, I sugest you just ignore him. All he "contributes" is background
noise.

Armando Santos

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Tim Hunter]

I am sure everyone can agree on this.
Constructive criticism works best, makes it much easier to fix how it lacks
if told how it lacks.

If you think the documentation sucks, PLEASE tell Dave (or Dan, or whatever
else documentation you are reading) that it sucks and why it sucks, and if
your really feeling useful fix it for them or give them some pointers.

That's why free software and support are good.

-- Tim

> -Original Message-
> From: Jamin Collins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 2:54 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
>
>
> Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > You called the docs "highly inadequate", not "a little lacking when it
> > comes to helping someone completely new to qmail". In my
> > book, calling
> > something highly inadequate *is* calling it bad.
>
> Now, we are getting into a matter of semantics.  It was not my
> intention to
> say the documentation was bad.  I would say that your documentation is
> actually, better than what comes with qmail.  However, I do still
> see it as
> lacking where a new user is concerned.
>
> Jamin W. Collins
>

Re: Newbie Question

[asantos]

From: Louis Mushandu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sorry. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host,
>it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6)
>
>I have done rtfm bit, hones,t but now I seem to be going round in circles.


Follow the thread starting at man qmail-control, then man qmail-send, and
check your locals file. On a sligthly more palatable form (IMHO), try
http://binarios.com/miscnotes/qmail.html#q-control.

Armando

Re: Newbie Question

[Robin S. Socha]

* Louis Mushandu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I tried to send email to the box.  It produces the following error message

> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Sorry. Although I'm listed as a
> best-preference MX or A for that host, it isn't in my control/locals
> file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6)

> locals
> ::
> mail.wonder.com:mcuser01
> wonder.com

That is certainly wrong. mail.mongrel.com should be in there.

> virtualdomains
> ::
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]

And so is this.
-- 
Robin S. Socha 

inconsistency using qmail/Spamcontrol badrcptto

[Russ Ringer]

I'm using qmail 1.03/spamcontrol 1.03 (yes, I know, I haven't put in 1.04 yet) and 
have a list of invalid names in badrcptto. It works most of the time, but 
occasionally, mail comes through to the bad rcptto name. The maillog shows the mail 
was blocked due to invalid recipient address, but it gets delivered anyway. I examined 
the mail and the rcpt to: match the file and the msg/log timestamps match.

This is not a major problem, but it is puzzling. Any of you wizards care to speculate 
as to how/why this happens?

-->Russ Ringer

Re: [HELP] Domain in Sender: is missing

[Peter Samuel]

On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, montgomery f. tidwell wrote:

> Howdy,
> 
> i just noticed that mail sent out by my qmail server does
> not put my domain in to the Sender: field. it is going
> out as "Sender: mtidwell" and not "Sender:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> like it should.
> 
> what have i done wrong??

Chosen to use Netscape as your MUA.

This is a known problem with Netscape and has nothing to do with
qmail. Normally it isn't a problem as well behaved MUAs will not use the
Sender: field to generate a reply address, but unfortunately some broken
systems do (I don't know off hand which ones they are). If the Sender:
field is not fully qualified, this leads to the local MTA trying to
deliver the message to:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

instead of

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
Regards
Peter
--
Peter Samuel[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.e-smith.org (development)http://www.e-smith.com (corporate)
Phone: +1 613 368 4398  Fax: +1 613 564 7739
e-smith, inc. 1500-150 Metcalfe St, Ottawa, ON K2P 1P1 Canada

"If you kill all your unhappy customers, you'll only have happy ones left"

Frustrated, please help.

[Louis Mushandu]

All,

I cannot get qmail to accept messages from the outside, i posted a missive
before and the replies that I got whilst swift and appreciated have not
resolved by problem.

The recieved error message is 

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mail.mongrel.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sorry. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host,
it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6)

I was using ./Maildir/ but I have now changed to Mailbox in desperation.
My locals files is populated with mail.wonder.com, but still no cigar for
me.

Here are the contents of the files in my control directory

[mcuser01@mail control]$ more * 
::
bouncefrom
::
postmaster
::
concurrencyincoming
::
20
::
defaultdomain
::
.mongrel.com
::
locals
::
mail.mongrel.com
mongrel.com
::
me
::
mail.mongrel.com
::
plusdomain
::
mongrel.com
::
rcpthosts
::
mail.mongrel.com
::
virtualdomains
::
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Scott Ballantyne]

We old timers used to consider it rude to discuss anything but
technical issues on a technical mailing list. If someone had a problem
with someones manner of expression, or personality, they took it off
list. Please do so in the future. 

sdb
-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

***PAID consultancy required, company will pay ***

[Louis Mushandu]

A contractor will be brought in tomorrow to try and resolve the problem; if
you feel you can do it by tonight, email back in a hurry.  I jest not.

Problem. 

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mail.mongrel.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sorry. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host,
it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as local. (#5.4.6)


For further info please email.

Re: dot-qmail question (again) :-)

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 29 November 2000 at 14:27:14 
-0600
 > Peter Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 > > 
 > > IIRC, vpopmail .qmail files in the user's directory do NOT support direct
 > > delivery, nor do they support program execution. They only support
 > > ``forwarding'';
 > 
 > Ah, hence the original user's log of attempted deliveries to 
 > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" .  Shall we consider this issue closed now?  :)
 > Having never used vpopmail, I was unaware of this restriction on .qmail files.
 > Perhaps if they don't behave like other .qmail files, they should have
 > another name (.vpopmail comes to mind).

In fact, this can be cited as an example of the dangers of asking on
the wrong list.  It was really a vpopmail question, and I'll bet
people over on that mailing list would have spotted this issue
considerably sooner.
-- 
David Dyer-Bennet  /  Welcome to the future!  /  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/  Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/

Re: why didn't it send my msg?

[Markus Stumpf]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 10:53:03PM +0100, QBA wrote:
> Instead of "localhost.localdomain" I put there "qbaroot.dyndns.org".
> I had to do so 'cause some pop3 servers rejected my all e-mails.) 
> As a attachment I send my last maillog when I was trying to send a msg
> (hope it will be useful). I'd like to know why it didn't work and
> what to do to make it working. 

Nov 29 22:00:13 localhost qmail: 975531613.681071 info msg 28139: bytes 444 from
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 1309 uid 501
Nov 29 22:00:13 localhost qmail: 975531613.738866 starting delivery 2: msg 28139 to 
remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Did you add
qbaroot.dyndns.org
to your control/locals file?
And if so, did you  kill -HUP  ??

\Maex

-- 
SpaceNet AG   |   http://www.Space.Net/   | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 |  Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0| realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen  |  Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299  | fallen asleep yet.

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Tim Burden]

Such a list would pobably be ignored by the people that can really help. And
sometimes the stupid questions aren't from newbies, they are from genuinely
stupid lackwits like me.

Anyway RTFM is usually good advice. Sometimes we really are lazy or busy
setting up all kinds of crap on our systems and just hoping that someone
with a qmail-capacity brain will be kind enough to spew out some ready tips.



> > Maybe a "qmail-newbies"-list might be warranted?
>
> Here here. Then those who don't mind newbie level questions can answer
those
> and others can ignore the list entirely. I think qmail-newbies list is a
> great idea.
>
> > --
> > Robin S. Socha 
> >
>

RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Jamin Collins]

Louis Theran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:

> Really?  Is this a digression because you've already contacted LWQ's
> author with suggestions?  Have you posted anything to this list about
> the specific problems you had with INSTALL?

No to both, because I have not yet completed my configuration.  Once I have,
I will rebuild it again, and possibly one more time.  Just to be sure I have
what I want and that I know exactly how I did it.  Then, I will compare what
I've done with what is in the instructions for LWQ and possibly INSTALL.
Then I will submit my findings as appropriate.

> If you think that new users aren't well served by the available
> documentation, then you should contribute.  Somebody else wrote qmail
> for you.  Somebody else wrote LWQ for you.  You've even gotten help
> from the qmail list.

I absolutely agree, and fully plan to.

> Complaining about other posters won't help any new users.  If that's
> what you actually care about, try fixing the ``inadequate''
> instructions.

Again, I absolutely agree.  However, there is one thing missing here.  None
of this justifies beratting someone for asking for assistance.

Jamin W. Collins

Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)

[Andy Bradford]

Thus said "asantos" on Wed, 29 Nov 2000 22:13:18 -0100:

> For someone with such a doubtfull sense of humour as he shows to have
> welcoming IE users the way he does at http://socha.net/, he seems to be
> inordinately proud of listing among his "computer skills" Microsoft Office.

Bah!  That's a lot nicer than what I used to have on my webpage:
http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/fun.html

Andy
p.s. only works with 9x not NT
[---[system uptime]]
  5:35pm  up 27 days, 19:55,  2 users,  load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00