spmacontrol patch 1.4.2 for qmail .
Hello all , I have a patched my qmail with the spamcontrol patch version 1.4.2 which can be found in : http://www.feccom.de/qmail/spam.html This patch enables the badrcptpatterns under ../control/ in the qmail directory but it seems to be that it disables the badmailfrom because qmail is ignoring the entries I have entered in this file . Can You please help to solve this issue because its really anoting that i can't use the badmailfrom . Thanks , Nissim .
qmail Digest 1 May 2001 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1351
qmail Digest 1 May 2001 10:00:00 - Issue 1351 Topics (messages 61669 through 61722): Re: POP3 Login 61669 by: Chris Johnson 61670 by: qmail mailing list 61671 by: QML Killer 61672 by: Wagner Teixeira 61674 by: Henning Brauer 61685 by: |nix ZixinG 61695 by: Rick Updegrove 61715 by: Tim Legant Re: How can qmail scale? 61673 by: Henning Brauer Maildrop : Good info/examples ? 61675 by: Tom Vandeplas 61676 by: Robert Sander [Announce] oMail-webmail 0.98.2 61677 by: Olivier M. queue problems 61678 by: Neil Grant 61679 by: Charles Cazabon 61687 by: David Talkington username@domain@domain relay hole ! 61680 by: Nissim Penias 61682 by: Charles Cazabon 61684 by: Nissim Penias 61686 by: Charles Cazabon 61688 by: Robert Geller 61690 by: Markus Stumpf 61691 by: Charles Cazabon 61693 by: Markus Stumpf Re: Where does the mail goes? 61681 by: Marco Calistri username@domain@domain relay hole !!! 61683 by: Nissim Penias wildmat patch ??? 61689 by: Nissim Penias Postmaster : "sorry, no mailbox here with that name" - fastforward problem ? 61692 by: jcarreiro Postmaster - fastforward problem 61694 by: jcarreiro ¾Ç©f³QXXX... 61696 by: ªü±l [ANNOUNCE] TMDA 0.10 - python-based anti-spam system for qmail 61697 by: Jason R. Mastaler Problem with virtualdomains and VERPs (with patch) 61698 by: Patrick J. LoPresti masquerading and autoeresponders 61699 by: David Chait 61716 by: Tim Legant release qmailinstallmachime0.01 61700 by: Linux!audimed 61717 by: Tim Legant Stopping Message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 61701 by: Ted Mead 61718 by: Tim Legant Re: "A news.newusers.questions's Guide to Qmail" 61702 by: Frank Tegtmeyer Re: Help abot qmail and vpomail 61703 by: Keary Suska Re: Is qmail "best reserved for mailing list server purposes only"? 61704 by: John R. Levine 61708 by: Oleg Polyakov 61709 by: David L. Nicol 61710 by: David L. Nicol adding custom bounce headers (was Re: How do you handle the double bounces?) 61705 by: Jason R. Mastaler Relay for domains in rcpthosts 61706 by: ross.pro-web.ie 61707 by: Daniel Kelley 61719 by: Tim Legant qmail on OSF/Unix (Digital) and C2security 61711 by: Wiroon Ruangsang ¶W§C»ù15¦TTFT LCD ¿Ã¹õ 61712 by: ªü±l removing a particular *recipient* from the queue 61713 by: Omar Thameen 61714 by: Adam McKenna 61721 by: Omar Thameen ¥_¤@¤k...¶W¯Å»¶©f§Ú! 61720 by: ¤ý¥Ð§Q spmacontrol patch 1.4.2 for qmail . 61722 by: Nissim Penias 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] -- On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 03:15:41AM -0500, Aaron Goldblatt wrote: > When I try to retrieve mail via POP3 on the PRIVATE interface, it works, > but where the public side takes about two seconds to complete an empty > transaction, the private one takes as much as 60 seconds to authenticate > (Eudora hangs on "Logging in to server," which is its way of saying > login/password). If Eudora doesn't get sick of waiting it EVENTUALLY > works, but slowly. This question comes up about every three minutes on this list. See the list archives. Try searching for "pop3 slow." Chris PGP signature - Original Message - From: "Chris Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Aaron Goldblatt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 12:17 PM Subject: Re: POP3 Login Maybe it would be a good idea to discuss the options of tcpserver more thoroughly in LWQ and other qmail howto's. > "qmail" == qmail mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > - Original Message - Typical OE luser. -- "Windows isn't a virus, viruses do something." > > I'm experiencing a curious issue with qmail-popup/pop3d. > [snip] > > When I try to retrieve mail via POP3 on the PUBLIC interface, all > goes well. > > When I try to retrieve mail via POP3 on the PRIVATE interface, it works, > but where the public side takes about two seconds to complete an empty > transaction, the private one takes as much as 60 seconds to authenticate > (Eudora hangs on "Logging in to server," which is its way of saying > login/password). If Eudora doesn't get sick of waiting it EVENTUALLY > works, but slowly. > Thank you. It's a DNS matter. The delay u're experimenting is due to the reverse DNS checking - certainly the server cannot get the intranet clients' name using theyr IP and your clients
Re: queue problems
thanks for the really prompt answer next time I will do a search of qmail.org Neil _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
slow smtp connection
i am having slow smtp connectivity from an internal machine to my qmail smtp/firewall machine... once the message hits the smtp server, all is well what should i check? - hogan _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: slow smtp connection
John Hogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i am having slow smtp connectivity from an internal machine to my qmail >smtp/firewall machine... once the message hits the smtp server, all is well > > what should i check? The mailing list archives -- questions about slow network connections to qmail services come up every three minutes on this list. It's so bad, one of the regulars has actually added this FAQ and its answer to his .sig. You can find a link to the archives from www.qmail.org, or from "Life with qmail" at www.lifewithqmail.org. 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: slow smtp connection
> "John" == John Hogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > what should i check? The archives. -- "I had a fortune cookie the other day and it said: 'Outlook not so good'. I said: 'Sure, but Microsoft ships it anyway'."
SPAM Patches recomendations.
Greetz,
I've tested my qmail smtp server for spam using the Prodygy Solutions
relay test utility:
http://www.prodigysolutions.com/services/relay_test.php
And got 2(two) holes on my server:
* I'll omit the domain for security reasons of course.
Relay test 7
MAIL FROM:([EMAIL PROTECTED]@mail.mydomain.com)
250 ok
RCPT TO:("nobody%prodigysolutions.com")
250 ok (Failed Test)
RSET
250 flushed
Relay test 13
MAIL FROM:([EMAIL PROTECTED]@mail.mydomain.com)
250 ok
RCPT TO:(prodigysolutions.com!nobody)
250 ok (Failed Test)
RSET
250 flushed
Anyone has any tip to fix these problems ? (patches/etc) ?
Another question: Emails on using % and ! as the domain separator should
work ?
Best Regards,
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Eduardo Augusto Alvarenga - Analista de Suporte - #179653
Blumenau - Santa Catarina. Tel. (47) 9102-3303
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
/"\
\ / Campanha da Fita ASCII - Contra Mail HTML
X ASCII Ribbon Campaign - Against HTML Mail
/ \
Re: SPAM Patches recomendations.
Eduardo Augusto Alvarenga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've tested my qmail smtp server for spam using the Prodygy Solutions > relay test utility: [...] > And got 2(two) holes on my server: No, you don't. Your machine didn't relay mail, and the tests (hah!) didn't even actually do any testing; they inferred a result from erroneous assumptions. Ignore the "tests" you did; they're worthless, and tell you nothing about whether your server is an open relay or not. Provided you have /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts, and it contains only your domains, and you're not setting the RELAYCLIENT environment variable for random IP addresses which connect to your SMTP port, then you are NOT an open relay. 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: slow smtp connection
man, you guys are tough - i thought it was a simple question... it probably took charles more time to type the links than to type the answer i'm sorry to have trouble you... for future reference, what sort of question would qualify for your enlightened views? - hogan At 09:31 AM 5/1/2001, Charles Cazabon wrote: >John Hogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> i am having slow smtp connectivity from an internal machine to my qmail >smtp/firewall machine... once the message hits the smtp server, all is well >> >> what should i check? > >The mailing list archives -- questions about slow network connections to qmail >services come up every three minutes on this list. It's so bad, one of the >regulars has actually added this FAQ and its answer to his .sig. > >You can find a link to the archives from www.qmail.org, or from "Life with >qmail" at www.lifewithqmail.org. > >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. >--- _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: slow smtp connection
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:53:01AM -0500, John Hogan wrote: > i'm sorry to have trouble you... for future reference, what sort of question > would qualify for your enlightened views? Perhaps one that you couldn't answer yourself with a minimum of effort. Chris PGP signature
Re: slow smtp connection
John Hogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> i am having slow smtp connectivity from an internal machine to my qmail > >> smtp/firewall machine... once the message hits the smtp server, all is > >> well what should i check? > > > >The mailing list archives [...] > >You can find a link to the archives from www.qmail.org, or from "Life with > >qmail" at www.lifewithqmail.org. > man, you guys are tough - i thought it was a simple question... it probably > took charles more time to type the links than to type the answer Yes, it did. However, if we just spoon-fed the answers every time someone asked a FAQ, that would encourage entirely the wrong behaviour from new members of the mailing list. It would have taken even less time for you to find the answer in the archives than to post your question to the list and wait for answers. > i'm sorry to have trouble you... for future reference, what sort of question > would qualify for your enlightened views? Basically anything which is not easily answered by looking at the FAQ included in the source, the FAQ on Dan's website, the www.qmail.org website, or "Life with qmail". If it's not in any of those, it's an advanced topic, and would almost certainly benefit from discussion with the various members of this list, all of whom bring different points of view to the table. 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: slow smtp connection
you know, i've had about enough of you guys... on and off the list... please don't email me anymore... i will be unsubscribing this morning i would be the first to admit that i'm not the 'guru' that you guys are... i've spent the last four full days trying to figure out qmail/tcpserver/qpopper/ezmlm and procmail - mostly because i thought that the open-source community was cool and helpful - you know TEAMWORK? - i have found that documentation is poorly written and poorly organized since i joined this list, i have gotten nothing but grief for my questions... i would estimate that i have printed/read over 200 pages of documentation on the various source packages, patches, add-ons and cetera that i have had to install... you would think that a few guys who know all there is to know wouldn't mind helping out the new guy on the block - boy, was i wrong - seems like the main function of the list is to distribute the links to faqs or more documentation i am sorry to have troubled you all... i would have liked to progress to your level... now, i realize that there's nothing to envy adios - hogan >On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:53:01AM -0500, John Hogan wrote: >> i'm sorry to have trouble you... for future reference, what sort of question >> would qualify for your enlightened views? > >Perhaps one that you couldn't answer yourself with a minimum of effort. > >Chris _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: slow smtp connection
>> for future reference, what sort of question would qualify for your enlightened views? << Probably NO QUESTION! -Original Message- From: John Hogan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 11:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: slow smtp connection man, you guys are tough - i thought it was a simple question... it probably took charles more time to type the links than to type the answer i'm sorry to have trouble you... for future reference, what sort of question would qualify for your enlightened views? - hogan At 09:31 AM 5/1/2001, Charles Cazabon wrote: >John Hogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> i am having slow smtp connectivity from an internal machine to my qmail smtp/firewall machine... once the message hits the smtp server, all is well >> >> what should i check? > >The mailing list archives -- questions about slow network connections to qmail >services come up every three minutes on this list. It's so bad, one of the >regulars has actually added this FAQ and its answer to his .sig. > >You can find a link to the archives from www.qmail.org, or from "Life with >qmail" at www.lifewithqmail.org. > >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. >--- _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: slow smtp connection
>>> for future reference, what sort of question would qualify for your >enlightened views? << > > >Probably NO QUESTION! you know, i've had about enough of you guys... on and off the list... please don't email me anymore... i will be unsubscribing this morning i would be the first to admit that i'm not the 'guru' that you guys are... i've spent the last four full days trying to figure out qmail/tcpserver/qpopper/ezmlm and procmail - mostly because i thought that the open-source community was cool and helpful - you know TEAMWORK? - i have found that documentation is poorly written and poorly organized since i joined this list, i have gotten nothing but grief for my questions... i would estimate that i have printed/read over 200 pages of documentation on the various source packages, patches, add-ons and cetera that i have had to install... you would think that a few guys who know all there is to know wouldn't mind helping out the new guy on the block - boy, was i wrong - seems like the main function of the list is to distribute the links to faqs or more documentation i am sorry to have troubled you all... i would have liked to progress to your level... now, i realize that there's nothing to envy adios - hogan >On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:53:01AM -0500, John Hogan wrote: >> i'm sorry to have trouble you... for future reference, what sort of question >> would qualify for your enlightened views? > >Perhaps one that you couldn't answer yourself with a minimum of effort. > >Chris _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: slow smtp connection
John Hogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > since i joined this list, i have gotten nothing but grief for my > questions... i would estimate that i have printed/read over 200 pages of > documentation on the various source packages, patches, add-ons and cetera > that i have had to install... We're sorry that installing and administrating a mailserver turned out to be more work than you thought it would be. Perhaps that's why competent mail admins are a rare commodity, and highly sought after. > you would think that a few guys who know all there is to know wouldn't mind > helping out the new guy on the block - boy, was i wrong - seems like the > main function of the list is to distribute the links to faqs or more > documentation Did you consider that the members of this list have better things to do with their time than spend eight hours a day answering the same three questions, over and over, when the answers are easily found through other means? A note to potential qmail newbies: we'll help you. Honestly. You just have to promise to do your homework, give it an honest try before asking for help, and to post good problem reports (detailing what you did, what the system did, and what you thought it was going to do instead, with complete logs and contents of control files). If you're not willing to promise that much, you will receive nothing but beatings for your pains, in this list, or anywhere else in life for that matter. 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: Is qmail "best reserved for mailing list server purposes only"?
I appreciate your pointing this out. >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John R. Levine) >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Is qmail "best reserved for mailing list server purposes >only"? >Date: 30 Apr 2001 19:15:38 -0400 > > >One last note on this thread. While rereading the FAQ, I came across this > >which indicates qmail has brakes to keep from generating denial of >service > >attacks. > > > >http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/efficiency.html > > > >Does qmail back off from dead hosts? > >Answer: Yes. qmail has three backoff features: ... > >Qmail backs off very well, but doesn't work all that well with >sendmail under heavy load. The problem is that sendmail keeps >accepting connections even when it doesn't have enough system >resources to accept mail, and tends to thrash to death. (Qmail >systems usually use tcpserver which enforces a maximum number of >simultaneous connections rejecting any beyond that limit.) But since >sendmail doesn't reject connections, qmail can't tell that the >recipient system isn't responding. > >Sendmail users tend to assume that anything sendmail does must be >right, and anything different must be wrong, so they often blame qmail >for opening "too many" connections. In reality, the connections could >just as easily come from any other mail system, of course. > > >-- >John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 >[EMAIL PROTECTED], Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, >http://iecc.com/johnl, >Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Re: Which IMAP do you prefer with qmail?
I appreciated hearing from you about Courier. I'm going to start out with Courier. Wish me luck! I have a big job ahead of me with installing qmail, courier, ldap, etc. By the way, your http://my.gnus.org website is very impressive. >From: "Robin S. Socha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Which IMAP do you prefer with qmail? >Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 16:47:29 -0400 > >* q question <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010429 16:38]: > >Your parents must hate you. > > > I'm curious, not to really try to create a survey, but of those of you >on > > this list using qmail with IMAP, which IMAP are you using? > >Courier - what else? Cyrus is nice but uses proprietary formats noone >really needs and UW IMAP is brought to you by the security Gods that >brohgt you pine. Mbwhahaha... http://mail.socha.net/about/ for a setup >that makes me and my users equally happy. >-- >Robin S. Socha >http://my.gnus.org/ - To boldly frobnicate what no newbie has grokked >before. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Re: slow smtp connection
John Hogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > you know, i've had about enough of you guys... on and off the Simply do what you are told to do. Look at the archive. Your question was answered at least two times in the last two days and about ten times in the last week. Frank
RE: slow smtp connection
Wow, good come back Kirti. Retard. ./trav At 12:16 PM 5/1/2001 -0400, you wrote: > >> for future reference, what sort of question would qualify for your >enlightened views? << > >Probably NO QUESTION! > > >-Original Message- >From: John Hogan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 11:53 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: slow smtp connection > > >man, you guys are tough - i thought it was a simple question... it probably >took charles more time to type the links than to type the answer > >i'm sorry to have trouble you... for future reference, what sort of question >would qualify for your enlightened views? > >- hogan > >At 09:31 AM 5/1/2001, Charles Cazabon wrote: > >John Hogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> i am having slow smtp connectivity from an internal machine to my qmail >smtp/firewall machine... once the message hits the smtp server, all is well > >> > >> what should i check? > > > >The mailing list archives -- questions about slow network connections to >qmail > >services come up every three minutes on this list. It's so bad, one of the > >regulars has actually added this FAQ and its answer to his .sig. > > > >You can find a link to the archives from www.qmail.org, or from "Life with > >qmail" at www.lifewithqmail.org. > > > >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. > >--- > > >_ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: slow smtp connection
At 10:34 AM 5/1/2001 -0600, you wrote: >John Hogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > since i joined this list, i have gotten nothing but grief for my > > questions... i would estimate that i have printed/read over 200 pages of > > documentation on the various source packages, patches, add-ons and cetera > > that i have had to install... > >We're sorry that installing and administrating a mailserver turned out to be >more work than you thought it would be. Perhaps that's why competent mail >admins are a rare commodity, and highly sought after. True, but maybe a little humility would be better than a lot of condescension. I know its been said before but you do not have to answer Charles. > > you would think that a few guys who know all there is to know wouldn't mind > > helping out the new guy on the block - boy, was i wrong - seems like the > > main function of the list is to distribute the links to faqs or more > > documentation > >Did you consider that the members of this list have better things to do with >their time than spend eight hours a day answering the same three questions, >over and over, when the answers are easily found through other means? > >A note to potential qmail newbies: we'll help you. Honestly. You just have >to promise to do your homework, give it an honest try before asking for help, >and to post good problem reports (detailing what you did, what the system did, >and what you thought it was going to do instead, with complete logs and >contents of control files). If you're not willing to promise that much, you >will receive nothing but beatings for your pains, in this list, or anywhere >else in life for that matter. > >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. >--- Again very true and great advice. Though once again there are people who answer these repetitive questions if the writers heart seems to be in the right place. It is your choice not to but you cant believe that your opinion is ./ on this mailing list. ./trav
Re: spmacontrol patch 1.4.2 for qmail .
Spam Control 1.4.2 may be using wildmat v0.3 at http://www.unixpimps.org/wildmat/ but, I don't remember. That version removed badmailfrom. Personaly I would really like to have a badmailfrom when I don't use any wildcards. -- SgtChains mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] cat BOFH | sed s/Operator/Postmaster/g > BPFH --On Tuesday, May 01, 2001 11:16:38 +0200 Nissim Penias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello all , > > I have a patched my qmail with the spamcontrol patch version 1.4.2 which > can be found in : http://www.feccom.de/qmail/spam.html > This patch enables the badrcptpatterns under ../control/ in the qmail > directory but it seems to be that it disables the badmailfrom because > qmail is ignoring the entries I have entered in this file . > Can You please help to solve this issue because its really anoting that i > can't use the badmailfrom . > Thanks , > Nissim .
Re: slow smtp connection
> "Charles" == Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > A note to potential qmail newbies: we'll help you. Honestly. You > just have to promise to do your homework, give it an honest try > before asking for help, and to post good problem reports (detailing > what you did, what the system did, and what you thought it was going > to do instead, with complete logs and contents of control files). > If you're not willing to promise that much, you will receive nothing > but beatings for your pains, in this list, or anywhere else in life > for that matter. Why isn't this type of message in the qmail-subscribe auto-generated reply? I have suggested this many times myself, and seen many other people suggest it as well. Simply pointing out this kind of thing and linking to the major sources of documentation would save a bundle of time and emotion. Of course, one could also point out that having the list message-moderated with a couple of good moderators in a couple of opposing timezones would significantly increase the signal to noise ratio. -- "Pascal, n.: A programming language named after a man who would turn over in his grave if he knew about it." - The Chartered Institution of C Programmers
Re: slow smtp connection
Hi John, I hope you don't unsubscribe from this email list. You are not alone in spending days printing and reading and feeling lost. I'm really dreading my installs. Actually, I know sendmail really well. I saved one company from spending $100,000 on a software package to solve a Unix/PC email problem that they had on their internal servers by rewriting the sendmail configuration files on their Unix servers so they would be able to send email directly between their PC and Unix users. I've also solved a lot of other tough pure Unix sendmail configuration issues over the years that others couldn't solve. But, actually I feel none of that sendmail knowledge is helping me with qmail, IMAP, LDAP, etc. To some extent it does, but not really. I also don't feel the slow connection problem that is reported so frequently is addressed well in the FAQ. I respect the person who is simply putting a summary reference/answer in his standard email footer. >From: John Hogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: slow smtp connection >Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 11:13:23 -0500 > >you know, i've had about enough of you guys... on and off the list... >please don't email me anymore... i will be unsubscribing this morning > >i would be the first to admit that i'm not the 'guru' that you guys are... >i've spent the last four full days trying to figure out >qmail/tcpserver/qpopper/ezmlm and procmail - mostly because i thought that >the open-source community was cool and helpful - you know TEAMWORK? - i >have found that documentation is poorly written and poorly organized > >since i joined this list, i have gotten nothing but grief for my >questions... i would estimate that i have printed/read over 200 pages of >documentation on the various source packages, patches, add-ons and cetera >that i have had to install... > >you would think that a few guys who know all there is to know wouldn't mind >helping out the new guy on the block - boy, was i wrong - seems like the >main function of the list is to distribute the links to faqs or more >documentation > >i am sorry to have troubled you all... i would have liked to progress to >your level... now, i realize that there's nothing to envy > >adios > >- hogan > > >On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:53:01AM -0500, John Hogan wrote: > >> i'm sorry to have trouble you... for future reference, what sort of >question > >> would qualify for your enlightened views? > > > >Perhaps one that you couldn't answer yourself with a minimum of effort. > > > >Chris > > >_ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Quoting (was: slow smtp connection)
> Wow, good come back Kirti. Retard. > > ./trav > > At 12:16 PM 5/1/2001 -0400, you wrote: > > >> for future reference, what sort of question would qualify for your > >enlightened views? << ... Does anybody know an English resource that provides the same as the following? http://learn.to/quote Regards, Frank
RE: slow smtp connection
Charles wrote: > A note to potential qmail newbies: we'll help you. Honestly. > You just have > to promise to do your homework, give it an honest try before > asking for help, > and to post good problem reports (detailing what you did, what > the system did, > and what you thought it was going to do instead, with complete logs and > contents of control files). If you're not willing to promise > that much, you > will receive nothing but beatings for your pains, in this list, > or anywhere > else in life for that matter. Charles, I agree with you here. I don't agree when you are always so harsh to people, but I understand why you are. Is there a way to send a "welcome" message when people subscribe that tells them this in nice big CAPS LOCKS or something. Like: -- Welcome to the qmail list, a list focused on discussion and development of the qmail mailserver. The list is composed of many users, administrators, and plenty of qmail newbies. Before you jump right in and ask for some tech support (which we often hand out in truck loads) please take a couple of things into consideration: -o Please check the FAQ's at http://cr.yp.to/ for qmail. -o Please read and/or search the archives. It is rare these days to get a question that hasn't been answered. -o If you are going to post to the list, please include REAL logs, unaltered that cover the scope of your problem but aren't 2000 lines long either. -o Try to include any other information that you think might be helpful such as weird network configurations, weird upstream ISPs, etc, etc. Thanks, and welcome to the list. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Something along those lines would be fine I would imagine. Is there already something like this? I don't remember. ;-) -davidu
Re: slow smtp connection
or how about breaking up the list to qmail-newbiesand qmail-arch, or somthing similar? i know this has been suggested before. dan On Tue, 01 May 2001, Brett Randall wrote: > > "Charles" == Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > A note to potential qmail newbies: we'll help you. Honestly. You > > just have to promise to do your homework, give it an honest try > > before asking for help, and to post good problem reports (detailing > > what you did, what the system did, and what you thought it was going > > to do instead, with complete logs and contents of control files). > > If you're not willing to promise that much, you will receive nothing > > but beatings for your pains, in this list, or anywhere else in life > > for that matter. > > Why isn't this type of message in the qmail-subscribe auto-generated > reply? I have suggested this many times myself, and seen many other > people suggest it as well. Simply pointing out this kind of thing and > linking to the major sources of documentation would save a bundle of > time and emotion. Of course, one could also point out that having the > list message-moderated with a couple of good moderators in a couple of > opposing timezones would significantly increase the signal to noise > ratio. > -- > "Pascal, n.: A programming language named after a man who would turn over > in his grave if he knew about it." > > - The Chartered Institution of C Programmers
ezmlm-idx error
I'm getting the following for one of my local lists: @40003aeef9c40fe92884 delivery 2345: deferral: Segmentation_Fault_-_core_dumped/ezmlm-moderate:_fatal:_Unknown_temporary_error_from_child/ This is a Solaris 8 box.. Anyone seen this before? This is standard ezmlm 0.53 + ezmlm-idx 0.40. --Adam
Re: POP3 Login
Yes, it is a great idea! >From: Tim Legant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: POP3 Login >Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 23:24:37 -0500 > >On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:02:24AM -0700, Rick Updegrove wrote: > > P.S. Should we all just just add the response to this FAQ our >signatures? > >What a great idea! > >Tim >-- >* * * | 1) It's SLOW!--> "man tcpserver" - especially -R,-H,-l >qmail | 2) Roaming users --> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#relaying > FAQS | 3) Secondary MX --> list in rcpthosts, NOT in >locals/virtualdomains >* * * | 4) Discard mail --> "#" line ONLY, in appropriate .qmail file * * * | 1) It's SLOW!--> "man tcpserver" - especially -R,-H,-l qmail | 2) Roaming users --> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#relaying FAQS | 3) Secondary MX --> list in rcpthosts, NOT in locals/virtualdomains * * * | 4) Discard mail --> "#" line ONLY, in appropriate .qmail file _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
RE: slow smtp connection
if you break it up then the newbies will just post to both lists. -Original Message- From: dan.kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 1:58 PM To: Brett Randall; Charles Cazabon Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: slow smtp connection or how about breaking up the list to qmail-newbiesand qmail-arch, or somthing similar? i know this has been suggested before. dan On Tue, 01 May 2001, Brett Randall wrote: > > "Charles" == Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > A note to potential qmail newbies: we'll help you. Honestly. You > > just have to promise to do your homework, give it an honest try > > before asking for help, and to post good problem reports (detailing > > what you did, what the system did, and what you thought it was going > > to do instead, with complete logs and contents of control files). > > If you're not willing to promise that much, you will receive nothing > > but beatings for your pains, in this list, or anywhere else in life > > for that matter. > > Why isn't this type of message in the qmail-subscribe auto-generated > reply? I have suggested this many times myself, and seen many other > people suggest it as well. Simply pointing out this kind of thing and > linking to the major sources of documentation would save a bundle of > time and emotion. Of course, one could also point out that having the > list message-moderated with a couple of good moderators in a couple of > opposing timezones would significantly increase the signal to noise > ratio. > -- > "Pascal, n.: A programming language named after a man who would turn over > in his grave if he knew about it." > > - The Chartered Institution of C Programmers
more info on ezmlm-idx problem
Here is the last few lines of a truss I ran on the ezmlm-moderate process.
It looks like the segfault is happening right after the fork(), but I don't
know what it's trying to fork.
--Adam
[...]
open("outlocal", O_RDONLY|O_NDELAY) = 3
read(3, " t e s t\n", 128) = 5
read(3, 0x0002BB05, 128)= 0
close(3)= 0
open("mod/lock", O_WRONLY|O_NDELAY|O_APPEND|O_CREAT, 0600) = 3
fcntl(3, F_SETLKW, 0xFFBEFA3C) = 0
stat("mod/pending/988741909.13238", 0x0002CD7C) = 0
open("mod/pending/988741909.13238", O_RDONLY|O_NDELAY) = 4
read(4, " R e t u r n - P a t h :".., 1024) = 810
lseek(4, 0, SEEK_SET) = 0
fork() = 13282
Segmentation Fault - core dumped
wait() = 13282 [0x8B00]
close(4)= 0
ezmlm-moderate: fatal: Unknown temporary error from child
write(2, " e z m l m - m o d e r a".., 58) = 58
_exit(111)
Re: slow smtp connection
From: "davidu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -o Please check the FAQ's at http://cr.yp.to/ for qmail. > -o Please read and/or search the archives. It is rare these days to get a > question that hasn't been answered. > -o If you are going to post to the list, please include REAL logs, > unaltered that cover the scope of your problem but aren't 2000 lines long > either. > -o Try to include any other information that you think might be helpful > such as weird network configurations, weird upstream ISPs, etc, etc. > > Thanks, and welcome to the list. I sure thought that would be a good idea when I suggested it last year. > Something along those lines would be fine I would imagine. Is there already > something like this? I don't remember. ;-) Absolutely not. When I asked this very question last year and was told repeatedly "it would never work". I was told that "people would not read it or comply with it anyway". So here we sit a year later going through the same thing day after day. : ) This list is what it is. Moderation would be a bad thing imho. Once I learned that most people are here to help and realized that I was just ignorant, and that I could educate myself (with the occasional help of others) I was a much happier person. Rick Up p.s. I am glad someone took my somewhat sarcastic advice yesterday and added the "qmail too slow" to his signature. I read this list every day when time permits and that very FAQ comes up on average at least once a day, if not more.
RE: slow smtp connection
Well said. Kirti -Original Message- From: davidu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 2:01 PM To: Charles Cazabon; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: slow smtp connection X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Importance: Normal Charles wrote: > A note to potential qmail newbies: we'll help you. Honestly. > You just have > to promise to do your homework, give it an honest try before > asking for help, > and to post good problem reports (detailing what you did, what > the system did, > and what you thought it was going to do instead, with complete logs and > contents of control files). If you're not willing to promise > that much, you > will receive nothing but beatings for your pains, in this list, > or anywhere > else in life for that matter. Charles, I agree with you here. I don't agree when you are always so harsh to people, but I understand why you are. Is there a way to send a "welcome" message when people subscribe that tells them this in nice big CAPS LOCKS or something. Like: -- Welcome to the qmail list, a list focused on discussion and development of the qmail mailserver. The list is composed of many users, administrators, and plenty of qmail newbies. Before you jump right in and ask for some tech support (which we often hand out in truck loads) please take a couple of things into consideration: -o Please check the FAQ's at http://cr.yp.to/ for qmail. -o Please read and/or search the archives. It is rare these days to get a question that hasn't been answered. -o If you are going to post to the list, please include REAL logs, unaltered that cover the scope of your problem but aren't 2000 lines long either. -o Try to include any other information that you think might be helpful such as weird network configurations, weird upstream ISPs, etc, etc. Thanks, and welcome to the list. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Something along those lines would be fine I would imagine. Is there already something like this? I don't remember. ;-) -davidu
Re: ezmlm-idx error
Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm getting the following for one of my local lists: > > @40003aeef9c40fe92884 delivery 2345: deferral: > >Segmentation_Fault_-_core_dumped/ezmlm-moderate:_fatal:_Unknown_temporary_error_from_child/ > > This is a Solaris 8 box.. Anyone seen this before? This is standard > ezmlm 0.53 + ezmlm-idx 0.40. It's either a 32-bit-ism in the ezmlm-idx sources (unlikely), or a bug in Sun's libraries (very likely). Which compiler did you use? Likely you'll have to truss/strace the program, or debug from the core file, to find the exact cause. 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: slow smtp connection
Alas, so very true Jeremy Suo-Anttila wrote: > if you break it up then the newbies will just post to both lists. > > -Original Message- > From: dan.kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 1:58 PM > To: Brett Randall; Charles Cazabon > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: slow smtp connection > > or how about breaking up the list to qmail-newbiesand qmail-arch, or > somthing > similar? i know this has been suggested before. > > dan > > On Tue, 01 May 2001, Brett Randall wrote: > > > "Charles" == Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > A note to potential qmail newbies: we'll help you. Honestly. You > > > just have to promise to do your homework, give it an honest try > > > before asking for help, and to post good problem reports (detailing > > > what you did, what the system did, and what you thought it was going > > > to do instead, with complete logs and contents of control files). > > > If you're not willing to promise that much, you will receive nothing > > > but beatings for your pains, in this list, or anywhere else in life > > > for that matter. > > > > Why isn't this type of message in the qmail-subscribe auto-generated > > reply? I have suggested this many times myself, and seen many other > > people suggest it as well. Simply pointing out this kind of thing and > > linking to the major sources of documentation would save a bundle of > > time and emotion. Of course, one could also point out that having the > > list message-moderated with a couple of good moderators in a couple of > > opposing timezones would significantly increase the signal to noise > > ratio. > > -- > > "Pascal, n.: A programming language named after a man who would turn over > > in his grave if he knew about it." > > > > - The Chartered Institution of C Programmers
Re: spmacontrol patch 1.4.2 for qmail .
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 11:16:38AM +0200, Nissim Penias wrote: > I have a patched my qmail with the spamcontrol patch version 1.4.2 which can be >found in : > http://www.feccom.de/qmail/spam.html > This patch enables the badrcptpatterns under ../control/ in the qmail directory but >it seems to be that > it disables the badmailfrom because qmail is ignoring the entries I have entered in >this file . 1) you have the READMEs for that patch, why don't you read them? 2) you have the source, so why don't you look at the source. 3) no, this patch does not remove badmailfrom support Why don't you show us the contents of your badmailfrom file and which addresses went through that shouldn't. And please use REAL data and not faked one. > Can You please help to solve this issue because its really anoting that i can't use >the badmailfrom . Maybe you should do a "man qmail-smtpd" and check the description of the format of the badmailfrom file with what you put in there. \Maex -- SpaceNet AG| Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0 Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen| Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 Stress is when you wake up screaming and you realize you haven't fallen asleep yet.
Re: slow smtp connection
> Well said. > > Kirti Me too (c).
autoresponder inter7.com
How I'm test my autoresponder? I'm setup my autoresponder from qmailamdin but not works... I'm it using autoresponder-1.0.0 for inter7.com
Re: slow smtp connection
right, but then you could moderate the qmail-arch list, and leave the qmail-newbies list open. (i'm cribbing of the freebsd lists; the freebsd-arch list gets virtually no static, near as i can tell). On Tue, 01 May 2001, denis wrote: > Alas, so very true > > Jeremy Suo-Anttila wrote: > > > if you break it up then the newbies will just post to both lists. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: dan.kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 1:58 PM > > To: Brett Randall; Charles Cazabon > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: slow smtp connection > > > > or how about breaking up the list to qmail-newbiesand qmail-arch, or > > somthing > > similar? i know this has been suggested before. > > > > dan > > > > On Tue, 01 May 2001, Brett Randall wrote: > > > > "Charles" == Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > A note to potential qmail newbies: we'll help you. Honestly. You > > > > just have to promise to do your homework, give it an honest try > > > > before asking for help, and to post good problem reports (detailing > > > > what you did, what the system did, and what you thought it was going > > > > to do instead, with complete logs and contents of control files). > > > > If you're not willing to promise that much, you will receive nothing > > > > but beatings for your pains, in this list, or anywhere else in life > > > > for that matter. > > > > > > Why isn't this type of message in the qmail-subscribe auto-generated > > > reply? I have suggested this many times myself, and seen many other > > > people suggest it as well. Simply pointing out this kind of thing and > > > linking to the major sources of documentation would save a bundle of > > > time and emotion. Of course, one could also point out that having the > > > list message-moderated with a couple of good moderators in a couple of > > > opposing timezones would significantly increase the signal to noise > > > ratio. > > > -- > > > "Pascal, n.: A programming language named after a man who would turn over > > > in his grave if he knew about it." > > > > > > - The Chartered Institution of C Programmers
need help understanding "status 256" log messages
We've recently switched from "sendmail" to "qmail" as the "SMTP Server" for the majority of Eudora/Outlook/Messenger clients on campus. We've been looking through the tcpserver/qmail logs and see a disturbing pattern. We see hundreds of entries per day like the following pair, mostly sporadic, but often occurring in clusters: Apr 25 10:31:38 larch SMTP: 988212698.570558 tcpserver: ok 620 larch.cc.uic.edu: 128.248.155.164:25070.counsel.uic.edu:131.193.141.82::1066 Apr 25 10:31:38 larch SMTP: 988212698.586034 tcpserver: end 620 status 256 It's the "status 256" that bothers us. It seems we don't see a "new msg" creation entry from qmail after these "status 256" entries, but we do see "new msg" not long after "status 0" entries. From what I can gather from reading the qmail discussion list archives, status 256 is somewhat of a "catch-all" for several possible problems. (Note: we are running the "fixcrio" filter to fix the "bare linefeed" problem and tcpserver is running paranoid if that matters. We've also checked to be sure that "status 256" hosts resolve correctly on inverse and forward DNS queries). So, here are some questions we hope someone will be able to answer: 1. Does "status 256" from tcpserver->qmail-smtpd on the SMTP conversation mean that no message was created for delivery? (It seems that way to us, but we'd be a bit shocked to hear it's true because we have not gotten many complaints, and it would seem that this would be a major problem). 2. Is there any way to get more verbosity/specificity out of qmail (other than by using "recordio") about what is happening to trigger the "status 256"? 3. Is there any way we can tie an "ok" log entry like the one above to the corresponding "new msg" entry created by qmail? We need to be able to tie it all together from first SMTP contact to final message disposition. This was possible in sendmail, but we're not seeing an obvious way to link the entire history of a message together in our qmail logs. We've searched the qmail mailing-list archives and have yet to find a clear answer to any of the 3 questions. The concurrency limit is set to 200 and the smtp.cdb contains just two entries to permit relaying only from our 2 class B networks. The server is redhat 6.2. The "free" command shows lots of available swap space. Could this be a ulimit problem? Any help is appreciated.
Re: autoresponder inter7.com
"Flavio Alberto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > How I'm test my autoresponder? I'm setup my autoresponder from qmailamdin > but not works... First have a look if it is inserted correctly. Second: look at the logfile. If you find anything there and don't know what it means, ask again (and don't forget to provide the log snippet then). Regards, Frank
Re: ezmlm-idx error
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 01:07:51PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: > Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm getting the following for one of my local lists: > > > > @40003aeef9c40fe92884 delivery 2345: deferral: > > >Segmentation_Fault_-_core_dumped/ezmlm-moderate:_fatal:_Unknown_temporary_error_from_child/ > > > > This is a Solaris 8 box.. Anyone seen this before? This is standard > > ezmlm 0.53 + ezmlm-idx 0.40. > > It's either a 32-bit-ism in the ezmlm-idx sources (unlikely), or a bug in > Sun's libraries (very likely). Which compiler did you use? Likely you'll > have to truss/strace the program, or debug from the core file, to find the > exact cause. adam@sunfish:~$ gcc -v Reading specs from /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/2.95.3/specs gcc version 2.95.3 20010315 (release) Did you see the truss output I posted? --Adam
Re: need help understanding "status 256" log messages
Jim O'Leary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We've been looking through the tcpserver/qmail logs and see a disturbing > pattern. [...] > It's the "status 256" that bothers us. It seems we don't see a "new msg" > creation entry from qmail after these "status 256" entries, but we do see > "new msg" not long after "status 0" entries. qmail-smtpd does this for a lot of different errors, and unfortunately, doesn't log a whole lot of information -- if a message gets as far as acceptance, and is injected into the queue, then qmail-send logs a lot of information, but this isn't always enough. Various patches have been posted to this list in the past to add more verbose logging. They may be referenced from www.qmail.org, or you can probably find them by searching the mailing list archives. > 1. Does "status 256" from tcpserver->qmail-smtpd on the SMTP conversation > mean that no message was created for delivery? (It seems that way to us, > but we'd be a bit shocked to hear it's true because we have not gotten many > complaints, and it would seem that this would be a major problem). It seems to mean a lot of things. Among the other things that appear to be able to cause it are buggy clients (both MUAs using SMTP to submit mail, like Outlook Express, and buggy MTAs, such as some versions of MS Exchange and Lotus Domino). You may wish to check what software and version is being run by the IP addresses getting a lot of these exit codes. > 2. Is there any way to get more verbosity/specificity out of qmail (other > than by using "recordio") about what is happening to trigger the "status 256"? Search for the patches mentioned above. > The concurrency limit is set to 200 and the smtp.cdb contains just two > entries to permit relaying only from our 2 class B networks. > > The server is redhat 6.2. The "free" command shows lots of available swap > space. > > Could this be a ulimit problem? It depends -- do you ever come close to the 200 concurrency limit you've set? Are you running out of file descriptors? 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: slow smtp connection
Why can you lusers not quote properly? Your mailtoys totally fuck up threading in decent MUAs and also destroy archives. I manually re-formatted your mail to make it readable. READ http://learn.to/edit_messages, *PLEASE*. Also note that I am subscribed to this list. *Do* *not* *Cc* *me*. * dan. kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010501 16:06]: > On Tue, 01 May 2001, denis wrote: > > Jeremy Suo-Anttila wrote: > > > dan.kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > On Tue, 01 May 2001, Brett Randall wrote: > > > > >"Charles" == Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > A note to potential qmail newbies: we'll help you. [...] > > > > > Why isn't this type of message in the qmail-subscribe > > > > > auto-generated reply? [...] Of course, one could also point out > > > > > that having the list message-moderated with a couple of good > > > > > moderators in a couple of opposing timezones would significantly > > > > > increase the signal to noise ratio. > > > > or how about breaking up the list to qmail-newbiesand > > > > qmail-arch, or somthing similar? i know this has been suggested > > > > before. > > > if you break it up then the newbies will just post to both lists. > > Alas, so very true > right, but then you could moderate the qmail-arch list, and leave the > qmail-newbies list open. (i'm cribbing of the freebsd lists; the > freebsd-arch list gets virtually no static, near as i can tell). Why leave the list open? There is a USENET newsgroup if you think you need to allow lusers to ask FAQs in technical forums. Moderated lists are usually good lists. Unmoderated lists are an invitation to lusers with MS Outlook to break them. QED. The qmail documentation available is better than for any other MTA I know. Dave Sill's LWQ is just great. Why bother with people to lazy/stupid/ignorant to read it? Can you name just one good reason (other than some pseudo-liberal "equal opportunities" BS)? -- Robin S. Socha http://my.gnus.org/ - To boldly frobnicate what no newbie has grokked before.
Re: ezmlm-idx error
Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 01:07:51PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: > > Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm getting the following for one of my local lists: > > > > > > @40003aeef9c40fe92884 delivery 2345: deferral: > > > >Segmentation_Fault_-_core_dumped/ezmlm-moderate:_fatal:_Unknown_temporary_error_from_child/ > > > > > > This is a Solaris 8 box.. Anyone seen this before? This is standard > > > ezmlm 0.53 + ezmlm-idx 0.40. > > > > It's either a 32-bit-ism in the ezmlm-idx sources (unlikely), or a bug in > > Sun's libraries (very likely). Which compiler did you use? Likely you'll > > have to truss/strace the program, or debug from the core file, to find the > > exact cause. > > adam@sunfish:~$ gcc -v > Reading specs from /usr/local/lib/gcc-lib/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/2.95.3/specs > gcc version 2.95.3 20010315 (release) > > Did you see the truss output I posted? Yes -- but the event which caused the core-dump appeared to happen in the child, so we don't know exactly what caused it. There are options to strace (and I assume truss) to make it also trace any children -- try adding that option to your truss invocation, and capture another trace. As a side note, your mail to this list is a good example of how to properly submit a problem report. 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: slow smtp connection
> http://learn.to/edit_messages Thanks Robin. Exactly that was meant when I wrote about http://learn.to/quote Regards, Frank
Re: slow smtp connection
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 01:01:00PM -0500, davidu wrote: > Charles, I agree with you here. I don't agree when you are always so harsh > to people, but I understand why you are. Is there a way to send a "welcome" > message when people subscribe that tells them this in nice big CAPS LOCKS or > something. Well, most people who install qmail probably got it from cr.yp.to, Dan's site. On that site is a prominent link to the FAQ. Many of the people who act so wounded when told to "do their homework" first claim that they've already read all the documentation, including the FAQ. If that's the case, then they've seen the following: -- What should I do if I have trouble with qmail? Answer: Read the documentation! Most questions are answered by - this list of frequently asked questions; - the qmail pictures, which show how qmail handles various types of messages; - the other how-to pages in /var/qmail/doc; and - the qmail manual pages in /var/qmail/man/cat*. Your system includes a wide variety of monitoring tools to show you what qmail is doing: - the qmail log, as introduced in /var/qmail/doc/TEST.*; - instcheck (in the qmail install directory), which looks for installation problems; - qmail-showctl, which explains your current configuration; - dot-forward -n (if you have installed dot-forward), which lets you see how a .forward file will be interpreted; - fastforward -n (if you have installed fastforward), which lets you see how a forwarding table will be interpreted; - ps, which lets you see what processes are running; - recordio (if you have installed ucspi-tcp) and tcpdump, which let you see what data is flowing over a TCP connection; and - a syscall tracing tool, trace or truss or strace or ktrace, which lets you see exactly how a program is interacting with the system. If all else fails, you could try asking for help on the qmail mailing list. Your message should give complete answers to the following three questions: 1.What exactly did you do? 2.What exactly did the computer do? 3.What exactly did you expect the computer to do? --- And there it is, plain as day. I don't think that people would be any more likely to read it if it were in the introductory mailing list message, as evidenced by the fact that large numbers of these same people can't even figure out how to unsubscribe. *That* much, at least is in the introductory message. The only other solution I can think of is to travel to each of these people's homes and staple the above to their foreheads. This, for obvious reasons (the cost of travel), is not going to happen. And so we continue to suffer and to suggest that they read the docs before asking the same question at 50 or 100 other people have in the last year. For the record, the above quote is located at http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/solutions.html#education and can be reached from the FAQ index by looking for the heading: "How to solve problems" Tim -- * * * | 1) It's SLOW!--> "man tcpserver" - especially -R,-H,-l qmail | 2) Roaming users --> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#relaying FAQS | 3) Secondary MX --> list in rcpthosts, NOT in locals/virtualdomains * * * | 4) Discard mail --> "#" line ONLY, in appropriate .qmail file
RE: slow smtp connection
With my respect to everyone on this list. I *really* feel some guys here think they are better than others. I don't think so. They can be more experienced in some tools they could never build alone. I beg Hogan's agreement to make mine his words, and suggest some guys to set up an autoresponder to this list saying: "Read the FAQs and do your homework". You aren't gods... I've had many difficulties trying to understand this wonderful and *very* poorly documented mail environment (qmail + tools), even with my systems expertise and C knowledge. I had to read the source code many times to discover some simple issues that ARE NOT IN ANY FUCKING FAQ. "The BEST" who think shoudn't "feed bla-bla-bla", why don't you just ignore and simply don't answer those "ridiculous" questions? Goodbye, guys. I'll leave your Olimpus now. > > you know, i've had about enough of you guys... on and off the > list... please don't email me anymore... i will be unsubscribing > this morning > > i would be the first to admit that i'm not the 'guru' that you > guys are... i've spent the last four full days trying to figure > out qmail/tcpserver/qpopper/ezmlm and procmail - mostly because i > thought that the open-source community was cool and helpful - you > know TEAMWORK? - i have found that documentation is poorly > written and poorly organized > > since i joined this list, i have gotten nothing but grief for my > questions... i would estimate that i have printed/read over 200 > pages of documentation on the various source packages, patches, > add-ons and cetera that i have had to install... > > you would think that a few guys who know all there is to know > wouldn't mind helping out the new guy on the block - boy, was i > wrong - seems like the main function of the list is to distribute > the links to faqs or more documentation > > i am sorry to have troubled you all... i would have liked to > progress to your level... now, i realize that there's nothing to envy > > adios > > - hogan > > >On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:53:01AM -0500, John Hogan wrote: > >> i'm sorry to have trouble you... for future reference, what > sort of question > >> would qualify for your enlightened views? > > > >Perhaps one that you couldn't answer yourself with a minimum of effort. > > > >Chris > > _ Do You > Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: need help understanding "status 256" log messages
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 02:44:04PM -0500, Jim O'Leary wrote: > We've recently switched from "sendmail" to "qmail" as the "SMTP Server" for > the majority of Eudora/Outlook/Messenger clients on campus. Well, this isn't an exact answer to your question - Charles already addressed that, but it's a comment about some additional software you might want to look into. Since you're a university and presumably have a spare IP or two, you might want to look into DJB's "mess822" package (http://cr.yp.to/mess822.html). One of the programs included therein is called "ofmipd". ofmipd is a substitute for qmail-smtpd. It's expressly designed to accept mail from (slighly dopey) PC clients through SMTP rather than from other SMTP servers. Now, we all know there should be no difference, but in reality, those clients can cause difficulties. ofmipd is a possible solution. You would run qmail-smtpd as your main SMTP server and point your MX records at that IP. You would run ofmipd on a different IP and tell your students to configure their mail clients to point to that box. It's simple and perhaps worth thinking about. Tim -- * * * | 1) It's SLOW!--> "man tcpserver" - especially -R,-H,-l qmail | 2) Roaming users --> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#relaying FAQS | 3) Secondary MX --> list in rcpthosts, NOT in locals/virtualdomains * * * | 4) Discard mail --> "#" line ONLY, in appropriate .qmail file
Re: slow smtp connection
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 06:28:15PM -0300, Wagner Teixeira wrote: > With my respect to everyone on this list. I *really* feel some guys here > think they are better than others. I don't think so. They can be more > experienced in some tools they could never build alone. [snip Zeus fantasies...] Have you noticed that the people who get frustrated over the same questions being asked again and again are the same people who answer the vast majority of real questions? For free? Day in and day out? That's where your whole argument falls apart. Tim -- * * * | 1) It's SLOW!--> "man tcpserver" - especially -R,-H,-l qmail | 2) Roaming users --> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#relaying FAQS | 3) Secondary MX --> list in rcpthosts, NOT in locals/virtualdomains * * * | 4) Discard mail --> "#" line ONLY, in appropriate .qmail file
Fwd: Re: slow smtp connection
>Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 14:50:49 -0700 >To: "Robin S. Socha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >From: Travis Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: slow smtp connection > >> >>Why leave the list open? There is a USENET newsgroup if you think you >>need to allow lusers to ask FAQs in technical forums. Moderated lists >>are usually good lists. Unmoderated lists are an invitation to lusers >>with MS Outlook to break them. QED. The qmail documentation available is >>better than for any other MTA I know. Dave Sill's LWQ is just great. Why >>bother with people to lazy/stupid/ignorant to read it? Can you name just >>one good reason (other than some pseudo-liberal "equal opportunities" BS)? >>-- >>Robin S. Socha >>http://my.gnus.org/ - To boldly frobnicate what no newbie has grokked before. > >If we are going to hash this same argument for the fortieth time could we >at least start the thread over that debates "Robins" sexuality? Guy or >Girl Rob/Robin? > >./trav
RE: slow smtp connection
>The only other solution I can think of is to travel to each of these >people's homes and staple the above to their foreheads. This, for >obvious reasons (the cost of travel), is not going to happen. Tim, Why not just write an web interface for subscribing to the list. In order to get to the actual form that asks for your email address, you would have to answer some basic questions that can be found in the FAQs and LWQ? Take the top 10 questions with multiple choice answers. Hit 8 out of 10 and you get to subscribe. Anything less and you are taken back to the FAQ page with a "Sorry, you haven't done your homework... Keep reading until you understand the basics" As much as I _hate_ sounds on web pages. THIS would be a great use of the "buzzer" sound and "Wrong Answer!" :) Bill P.S. To avoid the subsequent flames on this... I AM kidding!!!
Fwd: RE: slow smtp connection
In the infamous words of Kitri, well said Wagner. ./trav >Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm >Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] >From: "Wagner Teixeira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "John Hogan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: slow smtp connection >Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 18:28:15 -0300 >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) >Importance: Normal > > >With my respect to everyone on this list. I *really* feel some guys here >think they are better than others. I don't think so. They can be more >experienced in some tools they could never build alone. > >I beg Hogan's agreement to make mine his words, and suggest some guys to set >up an autoresponder to this list saying: "Read the FAQs and do your >homework". You aren't gods... > >I've had many difficulties trying to understand this wonderful and *very* >poorly documented mail environment (qmail + tools), even with my systems >expertise and C knowledge. I had to read the source code many times to >discover some simple issues that ARE NOT IN ANY FUCKING FAQ. > >"The BEST" who think shoudn't "feed bla-bla-bla", why don't you just ignore >and simply don't answer those "ridiculous" questions? > >Goodbye, guys. I'll leave your Olimpus now. > > > > > you know, i've had about enough of you guys... on and off the > > list... please don't email me anymore... i will be unsubscribing > > this morning > > > > i would be the first to admit that i'm not the 'guru' that you > > guys are... i've spent the last four full days trying to figure > > out qmail/tcpserver/qpopper/ezmlm and procmail - mostly because i > > thought that the open-source community was cool and helpful - you > > know TEAMWORK? - i have found that documentation is poorly > > written and poorly organized > > > > since i joined this list, i have gotten nothing but grief for my > > questions... i would estimate that i have printed/read over 200 > > pages of documentation on the various source packages, patches, > > add-ons and cetera that i have had to install... > > > > you would think that a few guys who know all there is to know > > wouldn't mind helping out the new guy on the block - boy, was i > > wrong - seems like the main function of the list is to distribute > > the links to faqs or more documentation > > > > i am sorry to have troubled you all... i would have liked to > > progress to your level... now, i realize that there's nothing to envy > > > > adios > > > > - hogan > > > > >On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:53:01AM -0500, John Hogan wrote: > > >> i'm sorry to have trouble you... for future reference, what > > sort of question > > >> would qualify for your enlightened views? > > > > > >Perhaps one that you couldn't answer yourself with a minimum of effort. > > > > > >Chris > > > > _ Do You > > Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: SPAM Patches recomendations.
You are better off asking ORBS to do a relay test, which is more reliable.
http://www.orbs.org/
-K
"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, because you are crunchy and taste
good with ketchup."
> From: Eduardo Augusto Alvarenga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 12:15:19 -0300
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: SPAM Patches recomendations.
>
> Greetz,
>
> I've tested my qmail smtp server for spam using the Prodygy Solutions
> relay test utility:
>
> http://www.prodigysolutions.com/services/relay_test.php
>
> And got 2(two) holes on my server:
>
> * I'll omit the domain for security reasons of course.
>
> Relay test 7
> MAIL FROM:([EMAIL PROTECTED]@mail.mydomain.com)
> 250 ok
> RCPT TO:("nobody%prodigysolutions.com")
> 250 ok (Failed Test)
> RSET
> 250 flushed
>
> Relay test 13
> MAIL FROM:([EMAIL PROTECTED]@mail.mydomain.com)
> 250 ok
> RCPT TO:(prodigysolutions.com!nobody)
> 250 ok (Failed Test)
> RSET
> 250 flushed
>
>
> Anyone has any tip to fix these problems ? (patches/etc) ?
> Another question: Emails on using % and ! as the domain separator should
> work ?
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Eduardo Augusto Alvarenga - Analista de Suporte - #179653
> Blumenau - Santa Catarina. Tel. (47) 9102-3303
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
> /"\
> \ / Campanha da Fita ASCII - Contra Mail HTML
> X ASCII Ribbon Campaign - Against HTML Mail
> / \
>
Re: ezmlm-idx error
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 02:47:44PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> Yes -- but the event which caused the core-dump appeared to happen in the
> child, so we don't know exactly what caused it. There are options to strace
> (and I assume truss) to make it also trace any children -- try adding that
> option to your truss invocation, and capture another trace.
The bastard child is ezmlm-send... I can run it on its own, I get the
following from truss:
open("mailinglist", O_RDONLY|O_NDELAY) = 5
read(5, " c o n t a c t t e s t".., 128) = 52
read(5, 0x0002E484, 128)= 0
close(5)= 0
open("listid", O_RDONLY|O_NDELAY) Err#2 ENOENT
open("headeradd", O_RDONLY|O_NDELAY)= 5
read(5, " P r e c e d e n c e : ".., 256) = 215
read(5, 0x0002E748, 256)= 0
close(5)= 0
read(0, " a s d f\n", 256) = 5
read(0, 0x0002E888, 256)= 0
write(4, " R e t u r n - P a t h :".., 139) = 139
fdsync(4, O_RDONLY|O_SYNC) = 0
fchmod(4, 0744) = 0
close(4)= 0
open("key", O_RDONLY|O_NDELAY) = 4
read(4, "80 3\0\098 2\0\0 d\0\0\0".., 32) = 32
read(4, "03 7\v\0 " =\v\0E6 C\v\0".., 32) = 32
read(4, " - k\v\0 b |\v\0D183\v\0".., 32) = 32
read(4, "B49F\v\0D6AD\v\0EEB5\v\0".., 32) = 32
read(4, "8EED\v\0A0F1\v\0 2FA\v\0".., 32) = 32
read(4, " i &\f\0E7 1\f\0A6 ;\f\0".., 32) = 32
read(4, "E2 |\f\0 t85\f\0 h93\f\0".., 32) = 32
read(4, "F1CF\f\084D8\f\01FE1\f\0".., 32) = 32
read(4, " * !\r\0 p /\r\005 8\r\0".., 32) = 16
read(4, 0x0002DB20, 32) = 0
close(4)= 0
Incurred fault #6, FLTBOUNDS %pc = 0x0001AF28
siginfo: SIGSEGV SEGV_MAPERR addr=0x
Received signal #11, SIGSEGV [default]
siginfo: SIGSEGV SEGV_MAPERR addr=0x
*** process killed ***
> As a side note, your mail to this list is a good example of how to properly
> submit a problem report.
Well, considering I've been reading the list for around 4 years now, I should
hope so :)
--Adam
Re: slow smtp connection
At 04:49 PM 5/1/2001 -0500, you wrote: >On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 06:28:15PM -0300, Wagner Teixeira wrote: > > With my respect to everyone on this list. I *really* feel some guys here > > think they are better than others. I don't think so. They can be more > > experienced in some tools they could never build alone. > >[snip Zeus fantasies...] > >Have you noticed that the people who get frustrated over the same >questions being asked again and again are the same people who answer the >vast majority of real questions? For free? Day in and day out? > >That's where your whole argument falls apart. > >Tim Oh so the fact that you answer a few questions allows you to be omniscient in deciding who gets flamed. Good one Tim! Your intellect knows no bounds. I believe your argument has some flaws though. ./trav >-- >* * * | 1) It's SLOW!--> "man tcpserver" - especially -R,-H,-l >qmail | 2) Roaming users --> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#relaying > FAQS | 3) Secondary MX --> list in rcpthosts, NOT in locals/virtualdomains >* * * | 4) Discard mail --> "#" line ONLY, in appropriate .qmail file
RE: slow smtp connection
>Tim, > > Why not just write an web interface for subscribing to the list. > In order to get to the actual form that asks for your email address, > you would have to answer some basic questions that can be found in > the FAQs and LWQ? Take the top 10 questions with multiple choice > answers. Hit 8 out of 10 and you get to subscribe. Anything less > and you are taken back to the FAQ page with a "Sorry, you haven't > done your homework... Keep reading until you understand the basics" You know, perhaps a better idea would be to make -H and -R on tcpserver the default, so this problem doesn't keep coming up on the list (nawww, makes too much damn sense to me). I usually don't take sides in discussions, but it seems to me that everyone wants to be so 3l33t, that we overlook the real goal, which is to rid the world of Microsoft and lousy performance vs. cost. If we result to taking quizzes, why don't we set up a CCIE type certification for qmail, so that everyone who passes the cert. can make a fortune consulting on installing qmail on linux/BSD/solaris, etc. I know when I can't figure something out, I usually give inter7.com a jingle for help (Unlike everyone else, I usually can't spend 2 to 3 hours trying to deal with something which should be very simple, but due to limited knowledge, I have difficultly understanding (and I learn new things on Linux every day). As someone who has worked in IT almost 19 years, and has messed with everything from punched cards and 7 track magnetic tape to Crays, we all seem to forget that everyone had to start somewhere, and as much as I hate to say so, most documentation for open source products is so piss poor that once I figure out how to get it working, I document the procedure completely on the platform that I use, so that the next poor guy/gal who comes along and needs to do it can get it up and running with a minimum of effort and toil. An example of good write ups and procedures can be found at www.linux.nf/stepbystep.htm which lists numerous pieces of useful information on how to get everything from apache to certain types of winmodems working under Caldera's OpenLinux series of products. Vent Mode: OFF -Bill
Strange Bounce
OK, I guess I have to fall in the "stupid" group today. I posted a message a little earlier to the qmail list with the subject of "RE: slow smtp connection" and it made the list fine. However, I received this as a bounce... === Return-Path: <> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 5277 invoked from network); 1 May 2001 17:19:42 -0500 Received: from fc.lesoleil.com (HELO mail.lesoleil.com) (216.191.11.2) by odin.wf.net with SMTP; 1 May 2001 17:19:42 -0500 Message-id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 18:18:33 -0400 Subject: NDN: RE: slow smtp connection X-FC-Icon-ID: 2031 X-FC-MachineGenerated: true To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: "Mailer-Daemon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Status: U X-UIDL: 988755582.5296.odin.wf.net,S=767 Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: qmail-list,Soleil (The name was not found at the remote site. Check that the name has been entered correctly.) PLEASE tell me this is a fluke... Or should I start looking for viruses? There was nothing else in the body of the message and no attachment. Bill
Re: slow smtp connection
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 03:35:11PM -0700, Travis Turner wrote: > Oh so the fact that you answer a few questions I wasn't referring to me. >allows you to be omniscient > in deciding who gets flamed. 1. No one has ever sought my permission to flame anyone. 2. In over a year on this list, I have flamed one person over a particularly appalling round of idiocy. Hardly omniscient. 3. Dave doesn't flame people at all. 4. Charles doesn't flame unless provoked. He first suggests using the available documentation, gets flamed (no, those people didn't consult me either) and replies. > Your intellect knows no > bounds. Er, yeah it does. Charles answers *far* more questions than I'm able to. > I believe your argument has some flaws though. I'd be curious what they are. You've only insulted me; you've said nothing about my argument. Tim -- * * * | 1) It's SLOW!--> "man tcpserver" - especially -R,-H,-l qmail | 2) Roaming users --> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#relaying FAQS | 3) Secondary MX --> list in rcpthosts, NOT in locals/virtualdomains * * * | 4) Discard mail --> "#" line ONLY, in appropriate .qmail file
test message
Test post to list
Both system account and virtual account of one domain.
Does qmail(or vpopmail) can do so that one domain can include some system accounts(via passwd) and some virtual accounts(via vpopmail w/ mysql)!!? Please advise. \TM
Re: Strange Bounce
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 05:57:36PM -0500, Bill Andersen wrote: > OK, I guess I have to fall in the "stupid" group today. I posted > a message a little earlier to the qmail list with the subject of > "RE: slow smtp connection" and it made the list fine. However, I > received this as a bounce... [snip bounce...] > PLEASE tell me this is a fluke... Or should I start looking for viruses? > There was nothing else in the body of the message and no attachment. Each time I post, I get one of these. It's been happening for the last few days. I think lasoleil (?) is misconfigured. Tim -- * * * | 1) It's SLOW!--> "man tcpserver" - especially -R,-H,-l qmail | 2) Roaming users --> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#relaying FAQS | 3) Secondary MX --> list in rcpthosts, NOT in locals/virtualdomains * * * | 4) Discard mail --> "#" line ONLY, in appropriate .qmail file
Re: Strange Bounce
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 05:57:36PM -0500, Bill Andersen wrote: > OK, I guess I have to fall in the "stupid" group today. I posted > a message a little earlier to the qmail list with the subject of > "RE: slow smtp connection" and it made the list fine. However, I > received this as a bounce... [snip] > Sorry. Your message could not be delivered to: > > qmail-list,Soleil (The name was not found at the remote site. Check that > the name has been entered correctly.) Some list subscriber has something misconfigured; his MTA is bouncing to the From address instead of to the envelope sender. I've gotten one of these for every message I've sent to the list the last couple of days. Chris PGP signature
Re: slow smtp connection
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Robin S. Socha wrote: >Also note that I am subscribed >to this list. *Do* *not* *Cc* *me*. I've been guilty too. It's an unfortunate result of the lack of a 'Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' field, which causes the MUA to assume that a reply will go to you definitely, and the list maybe. That requires the responder to remember to take an extra step. If I don't specifically remove your name before I send, you get my brilliance twice for the price of once. Listproc can do this. I'm hoping ezmlm can too. (And no, I'm not asking. I haven't got that far. If it's in the docs, I'll find it. ;-) - -d - -- David Talkington http://www.spotnet.org PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/dt000823.asc -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6 iQEVAwUBOu9JiL1ZYOtSwT+tAQH4Kwf7B8lnitSEMl4VO6Kj7Ted9P8oC5fJ7N/r vyd8qe3y30cS0wRU1777wg4aKix9wuQOKORFEepvRJiH8ioTTRFM1yhgZ/bwwX1i 0mysE3eRpZjwEtmxVvuSVzUxKp1zWEp2/0iiDMT/z2NWpWxOoGQyhub8SBh2PnfE LuhySm0+R+yWjJm5S+vSOuVVDw1wPjaVwKhtQdEGUBmHR/sC1qLfspvJlxRAZK83 K8ievDhxLJFUSJdJurrZ3PIiaJG7JBHT1GHd2oA8X2Th0sOepUT1o9gZEfWYOxO/ iv/n0uvDAlQo76XnzXo4jAqYp1XdS7g5JfDwQSxF+q74rqLCNYQONg== =N5Hk -END PGP SIGNATURE-
libc.so.6 error with RH 7.0
I'm trying to start qmail but /var/log/qmail/smtpd file is logging: /usr/local/bin/tcpserver: error while loading shared libraries: libc.so.6: failed to map segment from shared object: Cannot allocate memory. Any idea? Saludos Edgardo Lust
Re: slow smtp connection
> From: David Talkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 18:40:52 -0500 (CDT) > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Robin S. Socha wrote: > > >Also note that I am subscribed > >to this list. *Do* *not* *Cc* *me*. > > I've been guilty too. It's an unfortunate result of the lack of a > 'Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]' field, which causes the MUA to assume > that a reply will go to you definitely, and the list maybe. That > requires the responder to remember to take an extra step. If I don't > specifically remove your name before I send, you get my brilliance > twice for the price of once. > > Listproc can do this. I'm hoping ezmlm can too. (And no, I'm not > asking. I haven't got that far. If it's in the docs, I'll find it. > ;-) Reply-To used in this fashion is Considered Evil. RFC2822, in fact, explicitly says: The originator fields also provide the information required when replying to a message. When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates the mailbox(es) to which the author of the message suggests that replies be sent. Note that a mailing list manager is not "the originator". See also qmail's author's page: http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html as well as: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html Chris -- Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ virCIO http://www.virCIO.Com 4314 Avenue C Austin, TX 78751-3709 +1 512 374 0500 My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination. For an explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft, but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft. PGP signature
RE: slow smtp connection
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Wagner Teixeira wrote: >I've had many difficulties trying to understand this wonderful and *very* >poorly documented mail environment (qmail + tools), even with my systems >expertise and C knowledge. I had to read the source code many times to >discover some simple issues that ARE NOT IN ANY FUCKING FAQ. May I respectfully ask what those issues were? I know about as much C as I do Japanese (which is to say that it's a beautiful language, but I don't understand much of it yet). I certainly don't wish to insult anyone's intelligence, but much of this discussion puzzles me. One reason I chose qmail over our other options was precisely the meticulous documentation. Really ... I have yet to encounter a single question (not one!) that I couldn't answer by reading the docs a fifth or eighth time. I started with a solid Unix background, but only a general familiarity with SMTP. Did I screw it up? Hell yeah. Several times. And always because I missed a sentence in the docs. Bernstein is terse, no doubt about it ... but the ol' boy's also very thorough. I think so should anyone be who aspires to manage a networked system. Maybe the documents aren't organized in a way that makes sense to everybody, but I really believe you should always read the whole manual before you open the box anyway. The answers are there, even if they're not where you expect them to be. Experience can be a liability. Is it possible that you may bring with you assumptions that frustrated you and clouded your ability to really read all the documentation? - -d - -- David Talkington http://www.spotnet.org PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/dt000823.asc -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6 iQEVAwUBOu9UTr1ZYOtSwT+tAQHhJQgAtAjy70BWHDmqEjJOz9QLCa74HUt7we/L 3+u8YvHdXlXQ2H6Bpa5YvBHsn1ZmRG9EHXOAMd2NQxC0nvfJfgBo8SsB+Hyf2B5N JdG2Utm3mjB9YGeYqkCBDYrtIqHtHOT+9uNAq4Gv9neSLQYS6PzcCZSU6j3j8ipG xVsnRIfDiSlTM5NKdVgp3epB8gocy0XI4fYzggfRkqd1mNnYoGdcfGA+0XzuROaF zSJdGdwSoOOnKGPee3stt2T+S+MqXu+5485b2/5ntVr6Jqk33dMDAk3wbJIuI2+F 2IRyv2x6zBbZcnf7KDEcDY+VRqB9cuIqYsi3n6sUNxicudJ1FwpjsA== =8Qh8 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Ezmlm + SQL
I'm looking for a hand with a new Ezmlm server I'm building.. if anyone can point me towards a few good sites with information about migrating from one server to another I'd appreciate it. I've already read all the pages on the ezmlm.org site but they don't answer my questions about Ezmlm and SQL to the level I want... Mainly how to get SQL based archives...
I messed up my QMQP Client Config...
Hello All, I made a stupid mistake and left a QMQP Client machine with a bad IP in the qmqpservers file. I'm re-reading the Installing mini-qmail doc on http://cr.yp.to/qmail/mini.html and if I am reading it correctly, I'm screwed when it comes to getting those messages back. Am I right? There was only about 10 messages that should have been generated today and I can grab the info out of the MySQL DB and manually generate the E-Mails, but I'd like to know, more from a learning perspective than anything. Thanks in advance for any help, pointers, info, etc.. Tyrone UNIX is user-friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are... winmail.dat
Re: I messed up my QMQP Client Config...
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:12:36PM -0700, Tyrone Mills wrote: > Hello All, > > I made a stupid mistake and left a QMQP Client machine with a bad IP in the > qmqpservers file. I'm re-reading the Installing mini-qmail doc on > http://cr.yp.to/qmail/mini.html and if I am reading it correctly, I'm > screwed when it comes to getting those messages back. Am I right? Correct. It's the same as qmail-inject returning a non-zero exit code. The client that sent the mail should have noticed the failed injection and kept the original and alerted the user. > There was only about 10 messages that should have been generated > today and I can grab the info out of the MySQL DB and manually > generate the E-Mails, but I'd like to know, more from a learning > perspective than anything. It sounds like you are using a script to create/inject the emails. Maybe that script should pay closer attention to the exit code of whatever program it is using to inject the email. Regards.
Re: I messed up my QMQP Client Config...
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:12:36PM -0700, Tyrone Mills wrote: > Hello All, > > I made a stupid mistake and left a QMQP Client machine with a bad IP in the > qmqpservers file. I'm re-reading the Installing mini-qmail doc on Can you tell us what you mean by a bad IP? Was qmail-qmqpd running on that IP? If not, qmail-qmqpc will just skip it, according to the man page. If so, why was it "bad"? Tim -- * * * | 1) It's SLOW!--> "man tcpserver" - especially -R,-H,-l qmail | 2) Roaming users --> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#relaying FAQS | 3) Secondary MX --> list in rcpthosts, NOT in locals/virtualdomains * * * | 4) Discard mail --> "#" line ONLY, in appropriate .qmail file
Re: Strange Bounce
Tim Legant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Each time I post, I get one of these. It's been happening for the last > few days. I think lasoleil (?) is misconfigured. I already noticed Dan of that. I don't know if he found some matching addresses - in the meantime I blocked the lasoleil mail server at the IP level on my servers. Regards, Frank
Re: libc.so.6 error with RH 7.0
"Edgardo Lust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > error while loading shared libraries: libc.so.6: failed to map > segment from shared object: Cannot allocate memory. Possibly you installed a RPM that doesn't match your system. Please provide more information. Regards, Frank
RE: I messed up my QMQP Client Config...
Hi Tim, I was setting up a new QMail server on Sunday and had added the new IP to the qmqpservers file on my webserver. When I powered down the old QMail server, I deleted the wrong IP from the file. So I was left with a qmqpservers file with an IP address of a freshly retired QMail server. As Mark pointed out, I should have been checking the return code when I was generating the E-Mails. I wasn't, but will from this point on. My take on the qmail-qmqpc was that if the server was unavailable, there was no delivery and would be no queuing. You've confirmed that, so it's clear I need to do a better job of 1) Administering these servers better and 2) making sure when I create/inject an E-Mail that I bother to check that it made it. Thanks, Tyrone -Original Message- From: Tim Legant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 10:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: I messed up my QMQP Client Config... On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:12:36PM -0700, Tyrone Mills wrote: > Hello All, > > I made a stupid mistake and left a QMQP Client machine with a bad IP in the > qmqpservers file. I'm re-reading the Installing mini-qmail doc on Can you tell us what you mean by a bad IP? Was qmail-qmqpd running on that IP? If not, qmail-qmqpc will just skip it, according to the man page. If so, why was it "bad"? Tim -- * * * | 1) It's SLOW!--> "man tcpserver" - especially -R,-H,-l qmail | 2) Roaming users --> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#relaying FAQS | 3) Secondary MX --> list in rcpthosts, NOT in locals/virtualdomains * * * | 4) Discard mail --> "#" line ONLY, in appropriate .qmail file
Re: Ezmlm + SQL
"David Coley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Mainly how to get SQL based archives... If I remember it all correctly the archives are located in the filesystem. The database is only used for the subscriber information. If you want to archive in the database you have do use an additional tool that does it and feed it with the messages. Regards, Frank
RE: slow smtp connection
> From: Tim Legant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Have you noticed that the people who get frustrated over the same > questions being asked again and again are the same people who answer the > vast majority of real questions? For free? Day in and day out? > > That's where your whole argument falls apart. > That's why vacancies are made for. We all are volunteers here, day in and day out, but not all here (I refer to those that bring simple questions) read every single message - I bet. Those who offer volunteer support here (yes, FOR FREE!!!) must have in mind that he/she is doing that to minimize others' hard job to read everything about qmail. At least this is what I expect from discussion groups. Finally, come on, this is not a high volume list to people fell flooded. Regards Wagner.
Re: ezmlm warning
Hi, Can anyone tell me why I'm receiving this message apart from the obvious 99.9% of the Qmail List messages I receive anyway. The bottom of the message says relaying denied. Why on earth would I allow relaying on my server apart for myself and trusted users? Cheers, Kevin > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 195.224.255.14 does not like recipient. > Remote host said: 571 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Relaying denied. > Giving up on 195.224.255.14. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 3:36 AM Subject: ezmlm warning > Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list. > > > Messages to you seem to have been bouncing. I've attached a copy of > the first bounce message I received. > > If this message bounces too, I will send you a probe. If the probe bounces, > I will remove your address from the mailing list, without further notice. > > > I've kept a list of which messages bounced from your address. Copies of > these messages may be in the archive. To get message 12345 from the > archive, send an empty note to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Here are the message numbers: > >66217 >66218 > > --- Below this line is a copy of the bounce message I received. > > Return-Path: <> > Received: (qmail 18237 invoked for bounce); 20 Apr 2001 12:48:48 - > Date: 20 Apr 2001 12:48:48 - > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: failure notice > > Hi. This is the qmail-send program at muncher.math.uic.edu. > 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]>: > 195.224.255.14 does not like recipient. > Remote host said: 571 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Relaying denied. > Giving up on 195.224.255.14. > >
