Re: why didn't it send my msg?
on 12/1/00 13:18, QBA at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did 'ps -aux | grep qmail-smtpd' and got no message so I don't have it running. And that's why I have two more questions: 1. What means this line (about qmail) in my /etc/inetd.conf ? (I wrote it in my earlier message) Include the line anyway. Must I search for it? 2. How can I enable qmail-smtpd? What is the best way to do it? Thanks for your help, Ahhh... So basically what you're saying is you don't have a clue about inetd. You might want to look at the man page for it-- that way you won't have any questions. --jtb
Re: why didn't it send my msg?
on 12/1/00 13:29, QBA at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I also typed 'telnet 0 25' and here is what I got: Trying 0.0.0.0... Connected to 0. Escape character is '^]'. 220 qbaroot.dyndns.org ESMTP 'help' 214 qmail home page: http://pobox.com/~djb/qmail.html 'quit' 221 qbaroot.dyndns.org Connection closed by foreign host. So it looks similiar to yours but I don't understand what I did. What all these messages can tell me about my qmail? Thanks for help, They tell you you're connected to the smtp server on port 25 and that help can be found at the qmail home page. --jtb
Re: Force Queue run
Send qmail-send an ALRM signal. Better yet, if you configure qmail to use daemontools you can use the system V style script Dave Sill provides in his "Life with Qmail" page. IMHO you should read his page from start to finish before you even begin to install qmail. It's a must read. regards, --jtb From: Warren Small [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Mainstream EIS Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2000 13:54:20 -0500 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Force Queue run I was wondering if there was a way to force a queue run with qmail. For sendmail we would do: sendmail -q0 -v The -v is optional, of course. Since qmail handles the queue and retries differently I suspect that trying to do this is irrelevant. I am experimenting with qmail for the first time and the question came to me as I was looking at the queue and solving some local delivery problems. Warren
APOP auth using vchkpw-4.9.4 and /etc/passwd (shadow)
Hi there, I have no problems retrieving mail using pop authentication with vchkpw and /etc/passwd. However, when I authenticate using APOP I get an authorization error. Does vchkpw APOP authentication not support /etc/passwd (shadow)? Thanks in advance, --jtb
vchkpw APOP authentication using /etc/passwd (shadow)
Hi, Since I never got a response from my previous post, I assume my question was lame or lacked detail. I'll try again... Is there anyway I can configure vchkpw to handle APOP for /etc/passwd users? I know there are other means for handling this (patches to checkpassword, checkpw, etc.) but I like the logging features of vchkpw and the fact if configured, will maintain the relay cdb. I do NOT (at least at this time) wish to use vpopmail other than to maintain the relay cdb and for authentication. From investigation it appears virtual apop users' passwords are stored in clear text in order to match md5 hashed copies sent across the wire. Qualcomm's qpopper supports the use of APOP with /etc/shadow-- can vchkpw offer the same? Just curious, anyone know how qpopper utilizes /etc/shadow with APOP? I ask only because from searching the qmail archives it appears passwords need be stored in clear text on the server. The qmail site offers numerous alternatives, but if vchkpw can use /etc/shadow with APOP authentications, then I won't have to change the auth mechanism. A response of any sort would be appreciated. many thanks, --James
=local entries in qmail-users
Are there any circumstances where qmail-lspawn will find a match in qmail-users for a local address that didn't have anything prepended to it? Consider the scenario: virtualdomains contains mydomain.com:joe.schmoe and the assign file contains =joe.shmoe:joe:503:78:/home/joe::: Qmail-send translates the local part of [EMAIL PROTECTED] to joe.schmoe-joe.schmoe. Why then does qmail-pw2u create entries that contain =user: when there's no way matches can be made against those entries? I hope I'm making sense. regards, James
