RE: Concurrency connections
While transferring mail we were getting error deferral:qmail-spawn_unabme_to_fork_(#4.3.0) ... I'm already thinking file handles. What's the output of: 'cat /proc/sys/fs/file-*' when I changed control/concurrencyremote to 15 I could resolve the above mentioned problem , changed _from_ what? any other suggestion or patch you can suggest ...?? Yes. 1. Give the list more info. For example, what's going on in /var/log/messages. 2. Don't post html to a mailing list if you want the really smart guys to help you. 3. Always cut and paste log entries to this list, never retype. --joshua.
disallowing certain remote recipients
Hey all-- I've searched the archives and not found a solution that seems to solve the following problem: I have a box (lwq + qmail-verh basically) that runs a number of opt in lists. Recently, a user sent a bunch of UCE, and though that problem has been solved, I'd like to be able to enforce the request of those who complained and asked to never receive another email from us. Because I anticipate other users breaking their TOS at some point in the future, I'd like to be able to block certain outbound addresses at the qmail-send or qmail-remote level. Ideally, I would have a control file that listed addresses and wildcards that this box would refuse to send mail to. That is, if [EMAIL PROTECTED] requests that our service not allow sending to his domain, I could put that restriction on the box, regardless of whether [EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribes to one of these lists, or is added against her will or whatnot. Any and all advice would be appreciated, including pointing me to old discussion in the archives which I may have missed in my search. Thanks in advance, --joshua.
RE: disallowing certain remote recipients
Try the badrcptto patch or the spamcontrol patch, either of which will check against the envelope recipient and refuse to accept the message. Alternately, nullroute all of the MX's for the domain in question. Once again, these messages are not being received via qmail-smtpd. They are injected locally, so as far as I can tell, those patches will not help me. That's why I'm thinking qmail-send level. --joshua.
RE: Alias Error
alias:x:1000:102::/var/qmail/alias: Then under /var/qmail/alias And the ownership on /var/qmail/alias? It should be alias.qmail --joshua.
qmail-spawn errors
My logs are filling up with these errors: starting delivery 14152: msg 582933 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: local 0/10 remote 394/400 delivery 14150: deferral: qmail-spawn_unable_to_open_message._(#4.3.0)/ status: local 0/10 remote 393/400 starting delivery 14153: msg 582933 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED] status: local 0/10 remote 394/400 delivery 14152: deferral: qmail-spawn_unable_to_create_pipe._(#4.3.0)/ status: local 0/10 remote 393/400 delivery 14146: failure: Unable_to_run_qmail-remote./ alert: unable to append to bounce message; HELP! sleeping... (timestamps removed for readability - cut and paste otherwise) And the only thing unusual that has happened is that /var filled up during an ezmlm-send. Should I run queue-fix? Does it look like a queue problem? I'm not sure what other information would be helpful. I'm convinced it must have something to do with the full /var (now cleaned up a bit) but I'm not sure how, if at all, to fix it. I'd prefer to not lose the current queue. No, I did not mess with the queue at all. Thanks, --joshua.
RE: Mailing from One connection
I am sending different mails to 20,000 recipients at a time. So, each qmail-remote sends a mail to each recipient. or am I wrong No, that's more-or-less how it works. If in the total 20,000 mails, say 5000 are hotmail, 5000 are yahoo and the rest are to other domains. Then, is it possible to open a single qmail-remote process and dump all messages to be sent to hotmail on one connection and open another connection for all yahoo messages Not without alot of patching. I guess this speeds up the mail delivery amazingly Nope. It's pretty much a myth. Maybe you gain a little by opening fewer connections, but chances are some of them will timeout in the process and have to start over. This is covered in the archives, and discussed at some length in the ezmlm mailing list archives. --joshua.
RE: Quick question re maildir
weeks, and as part of the planning process am wondering if the general consensus is that the maildir method is the way to go. Appreciate comments/advice. Absolutely. Check the archives, there's alot of info there about the benefits of Maildirs. Recently, someone posted some excellent statistics on Maildir v. mbox. --joshua.
RE: Unable_to_open_./Maildir:_is_a_directory._(#4.2.1)/
Unable_to_open_./Maildir:_is_a_directory._(#4.2.1)/ @40003b4528aa1125e674 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 eventhough i set the mode to 777 at my Maildir, it didn't take any effect Listen to the error. It is not a DNS problem. Post the contents of /var/qmail/rc. Chances are REALLY good there's a typo there. Here's mine: #!/bin/sh exec env - PATH=/var/qmail/bin:$PATH \ qmail-start '|dot-forward .forward ./Maildir/' Oh, and change your permissions back. They should be 700. While you're at it, make sure the user owns the Maildir. This problem is all over the archives. Look there. --joshua.
RE: Error in patching Qmail with Krzysztof Dabrowski 's SMTP-AUTH patch
patch qmail-smtpd.patch snip What might be happening Well first, if you're using gnu patch (which you should be) that command is malformed. If it weren't, I may guess wrong -pnum. 'man patch' --joshua.
RE: problem starting qmail
svok: fatal: unable to chdir to /services/qmail-send: file does not exist qmail-send service no running If you followed Life with Qmail, there is no services, just service. If you didn't follow Life with Qmail, you should've. If this doesn't fix the problem, you'll need to post alot more information about how you are trying to start qmail. inetd or supervise? contents of run files? what command yields those errors? di it ever work, or is this a new install? etc, etc... --joshua.
RE: Help with Installation
I have been able to telnet to the SMTP service and send a message from myself to So smtp is running, are you sure that it's qmail-smtpd? Did you remember to kill sendmail? What do I need to check to make sure mail is getting delivered to where I want it? Did you properly configure /var/qmail/users/assign? You should also check your home directory on the server. Is there a Maildir? does the new directory contained delivered but unretrieved messages? Remo could well have a point about UW IMAP, if that is indeed what you're still using. Did you install a pop server? Is it working? What do your logs say? If you aren't getting any error messages, and the emails aren't bouncing, then they must be going somewhere? Please post your /var/qmail/rc file (and probably at least a sample of your assign file--we don't need 2000+ essentially identical lines) and tell us both how you are checking for messages, and where on the server you are expecting them to show up. Then maybe someone will be able to tell you why you're wrong, and where they're actually going. Oh yeah, and what Andrew said... permissions and ownership are crucial with qmail. --joshua.
RE: Maildir permissions
I want to take the general precaution of making the maildirs readable only to their owners (700). Will this cause qmail any fits? No. In fact, it's the default. --joshua.
.qmail files and list delivery
I'm having a problem getting an ezmlm list setup. I know that it has a seperate list, but I think this is a qmail configuration problem. Here is users/assign (yes, I ran qmail-newu): +:jjn:500:500:/home/jjn::: +soccer:soccer:514:514:/home/soccer::: =jjn:jjn:500:500:/home/jjn::: [snip - standard, functioning users, and yes, it ends with a single .] The list is called soccer-sunday. here is /home/soccer: total 16 drwxr-xr-x5 soccer soccer 4096 Jun 18 13:43 Desktop drwx--5 soccer soccer 4096 Jun 18 15:41 Maildir drwx--8 soccer soccer 4096 Jun 18 15:48 sunday drwx--2 soccer soccer 4096 Jun 18 13:43 supervise and here is the .qmail-sunday file: |/usr/bin/ezmlm-check /home/soccer/sunday |/usr/bin/ezmlm-reject '/home/soccer/sunday' |/usr/bin/ezmlm-send '/home/soccer/sunday' |/usr/bin/ezmlm-warn '/home/soccer/sunday' || exit 0 I put ezmlm-check in to see is the mail was even hitting the file. It isn't. The problem is this: All the messages sent to soccer-sunday@host are being delivered to the 'jjn' account. Shouldn't the more precise wildcard assignment '+soccer' take precedence over the less precise '+'? What am I missing? Why isn't qmail delivering to either the Maildir for soccer or to the list? thanks, --joshua.
RE: beginner of qmail - creating of users cdb database
database, I receive following error message: qmail-newu: fatal: bad format in users/assign Could you tell me plese, what is wrong? Well, you really ought to have posted the file, but I'd be willing to bet you forgot the last line. It is documented in the man pages that the last line of users/assign must contain a single period. I.e. =martin:martin:1001:0:/home/martin::: =joe:joe:501:501:/home/joe::: =sue:sue:502:502:/home/sue::: . Also, you may have a problem delivering to 'martin' because your account appears to be in the root group (GID=0). I know qmail won't deliver to root, can anyone confirm if it will deliver to members of group 0? Good luck --joshua.
Mail with many BCC:s and delivery delays
I need a bit of behavior clarification for injecting a single mail to many recipients. If I send 1 message to 100,000 people using BCC:s, what happens if another such message is sent, or, for that matter, a regular (i.e. non-list) message? What I mean is, if qmail processes message in the order received, and it receives a message to 100,000 recipients, does that mean that it won't start sending the next injected message until the first is completely delivered? (or at least attempted and deferred?). Like with this list... Let's say Charles sends a message 1/10 of a second after I send this one. Does that mean that qmail won't even /try/ to send his until mine has been completely delivered? If so, how does anyone run both standard email accounts and large lists on the same box without experiencing HUGE delays on their regular outbound email? Sorry, I'm sure this is a FAQ, but I couldn't seem to find a clear answer in the archives. Thanks, --joshua.
RE: many mails
Gianni Campanile [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A specialized process gets the body of the messages and the addressees and it is ready to call a mailer . I wonder if qmail can help me: my real problem is that I don't wont to call a command (like qmail-inject) for each mail to send, that would slow down terribly. How exactly do you plan to do it faster than qmail-inject, and anyway, what could you possibly need to get out faster than qmail-inject is capable of doing? I use a PERL script that can queue up 10,000 messages in a few minutes, and that uses the sendmail replacement--calling qmail-inject directly would probably be a bit faster. Does /anyone/ have a qmail system that can deliver faster than qmail-inject can queue? For that matter, can any mta do it faster than qmail-inject can queue? I'm sure there's one somewhere, but I think it would take a hell of a lot more than 10,000 messages to make a noticeable difference. --joshua.
RE: Multiple recipients to remote domain
Not true. It simply means that the remote system would have to implement VERP when qmail-remote tells the smtpd that the envelope sender is list-@[]@host.example.com. Unfortunately, qmail-remote and VERP-compatible smtp servers do not cooperate in that manner. All this talk of delivery optimization and VERP actually raises a few question for me: 1. Is there a seperate instance of qmail-remote for each bcc: header? 2. If so, how does one message with many recipients save memory or run faster? Wouldn't there be an identical number of messages in memory as sending many messages with one recipient? I'm assuming the answer is no, otherwise it wouldn't be recommended, right? 4. Does the existing qmail-verh patch work on the body of the message? The archives suggest that this would be VERB, not VERP or VERH. 5. If qmail-verh won't do replacements on the body, did anyone ever write a qmail-verb patch? 6. Does implementing VERB or VERH negate the benefits of 1 message, many recipients? Lyris and L-soft both claim that their mtas are better (faster) because they will do domain batching. If they are not misleading the masses, has anyone thought of ways (or developed patches) to implement this behavior in qmail? Russ? Perhaps this is all misguided conversation, but it seems to me that most of the threads on the list fall into 1 of 2 categories: 1. Qmail doesn't work (read as I broke it * ). 2. How can I get ___ to work better? (Expect What problem are you trying to solve?) What are people's thoughts? Feel free to respond off-list if you feel this is off-topic. I am thinking of assembling a document containing (founded upon) the best advice from the gurus, because these sorts of issues so often make it to the list (and past the archives). --joshua. *often: I broke it, but am so used to paying too much for crappy software, that I naturally assume that something is wrong with the program.
RE: Suspending an POP3 account.
(lack of payment) clients when using a passwd/shadow authentication method. Any ideas on a solution? Though different checkpassword and pop programs will handle the problem differently, changing the _permissions_ on the ~Maildir/* so the owner doesn't have read access will work. That is, typical Maildir perms are 700, change it to 300. All mail will be delivered as usual, but the pop account will not work. If the user has telnet access, they will be able to circumvent this, but in a situation where you have expiring pop accounts, I'm assuming they don't. I imagine you could easily set the return error so that the user's mta tells them they're delinquent. It's not everyday the problem is a permission denied read on the Maildir. --joshua.
RE: bounce handling
Charles Cazabon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No need for a special header; there are options to qmail-inject to make qmail use per-recipient VERP. Handling the bounces is up to you; in essence, you create a .qmail-something-default file and pipe the messages to a script of your choosing. In your case, you'd just log the $DEFAULT portion to a file. What I'd like to do though, is take advantage of the ~20 day testing that ezmlm provides. I don't want to end up unsubscribing people because of an Out of office message or a temporary errors like mailbox full unless they've been occurring for a few weeks. If I understand the documentation correctly, VERP will just add the recipient address (or certain other info) to the envelope, and I don't see how that helps me. If I set up a .qmail-something file, and then piped all the messages through a script, wouldn't that catch ALL messages (misdirected unsubscribes, out of office, mailbox full, delivery delays, etc.)? Or, are you saying that duplicating this is just a matter of using VERP and writing my own ezmlm-warn and ezmlm-return? Heh, just... --joshua.
RE: No mailbox for root
Whenever I send mail to root@localhost I get an error message root@mydomain Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. (#5.1.1) qmail won't deliver to root. You want somethin like this in /var/qmail/users/assign =root:USERNAME:UID:GID:/home/USERNAME::: I'm making alot of assumptions here, but since you didn't give us any details... Why do you need to email root anyway? --joshua.
RE: ms-outlook bug
The problem I am referring to is the one where Outlook Express and Outlook 2000 get stuck while downloading certain messages, supposedly due to a bug in the MUA's. (The only solution I heard of is deleting the offending message) I have been using Outlook for ~2-3 years on a vpopmail server, and have never had a single message cause a problem like this. In fact, this is the first I'd ever heard of such a thing. Currently I'm just using vanilla qmail-pop3d, and in 25,000 or so messages, I haven't run into such a thing, but I haven't really hit widespread use yet. --joshua.
RE: pop server
What about mail clients mail readers (mutt, elm pine, etc) using Maildir? --yapedu/xgnu Mutt plays well with Maildirs. Good mutt. --joshua.
bounce handling
Hey all-- I have ezmlm installed, and really like it's bounce detection, but for certain reasons I must use a different mailing list manager. I'd like to take advantage of it's bounce handling though. Is there a way to have qmail watch for a certain header, and then implement bounce tracking on a non-ezmlm message? That is, let's say I send out a message to the list nicholsfamily. If I put a header in the message that says X-List-Message: yes-nicholsfamily I'd like qmail to treat it like an outgoing ezmlm message, so that if it bounces, it's tracked in the ezmlm manner. At the last minute though, when ezmlm would unsubscribe the user, I'd like it to do something else, like add the user to a text file, or send an email to a specific address--probably ideal would be to just run a script, that way the script could do any combination of the above as the admin saw fit. Does anybody have or know of anything that aproximates this kind of behavior in qmail? I think it would be a very useful feature for many users of qmail who run other mailing list managers for whatever reason. thanks, --joshua.
RE: better methods to install qmail on linux ( Redhat 6.2 or 7.0)
like volume wise what is the space for / what is the space for /boot what is the space for /home what is the space for /usr what is the space for /var what is the space for /swap what is the space for /tmp thanks for the help in advance If you use Red Hat, it will try to set up appropriate server partitions for you, but it will fail: /usr will be WAY too big /home will probably be too big /var will be WAY too small to accommodate any serious volume of qmail traffic I can say this with some confidence, because my server (using the 'standard' partition sizes) has quite a bit of software installed on /usr, and is 90% free, but after one week of qmail use, /var filled up (from both queue and logs). --joshua.
RE: qmail is slow
Don't pass the deliveries off to relays. In doing so, you're taking one message with 45000 recipients and making it 45000 messages with one recipient. This brings up an interesting question. If I'm sending a message to 100k people, but I need a unique unsubscribe link at the end, can qmail be convinced that it's only one message, and 100k recipients? I.E. Dear reader- samesamsamesame samesame ... same. --Me My Company To remove yourself from this list, click here: http://www.foo.com/unsubscribe.cgi?e=joe:=user.com In this example everything is the same except the link, and the link is derived from the To: header. Basically, what I'm asking is if there is a more efficient way of creating the unique link than injecting the message 100k times. --joshua.
RE: big-concurrency patch
to put it into appropriate patch files, but when I run patch -p1 big-concurrency.patch it asks me what file I want to patch. Strictly speaking, it's /possible/ that your version of patch is getting screwed up by the email header. Try removing everything above the first 'diff' line. Then copy it to your qmail-1.03 src directory, then just try counting your peas. :) patch -p0 big-concurrency.edited patch -p1 big-concurrency.edited at least one of them should work... unless you have applied another patch? --joshua.
/var partition, queue size, and sendmail
I recently discovered that my /var partition is not going to be large enough to accomodate my queue at certain times, and was hoping for some insight. As a temporary fix, I moved the queue to another partition (/home of all places) and created a symbolic link. I realize that there are some security concerns with this solution, so I am seeking advice. Is there a (reasonably) safe utility to resize my partitions without starting over (which is not really an option)? Is there another acceptable place to store the queue? And if so, is a symbolic link acceptable, or should I recompile to reflect the new queue location? Are there performance concerns here? Here's my partition table, and the output of 'df' for your consideration. The system is RedHat 7.0. partition table: Disk /dev/sda: 255 heads, 63 sectors, 2202 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 bytes Device BootStart EndBlocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 1 3 24066 83 Linux /dev/sda2 4 2202 17663467+ 5 Extended /dev/sda5 4 1002 8024436 83 Linux /dev/sda6 1003 2001 8024436 83 Linux /dev/sda7 2002 2034265041 83 Linux /dev/sda8 2035 2067265041 83 Linux /dev/sda9 2068 2100265041 82 Linux swap df: Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on /dev/sda8 256667243418 0 100% / /dev/sda123302 9106 12993 42% /boot /dev/sda6 7898380 97088 7400072 2% /home /dev/sda5 7898380 1000684 6496476 14% /usr /dev/sda7 256667 57363186052 24% /var The cause of the large queue is a mailing list that sends about 150,000 messages at 10-25k per message once a week (via qmail's replacement for sendmail), so I figure I'll bring up the large queue problem as well. I know this borders on an FAQ, but what I'm not sure of is this--is there /any/ way to avoid the queue size limit of 20ish thousand messages? As I understand it, the big-todo patch doesn't actually solve it, it just splits up the todo directory, and conf-split is only able to increase performance. Please tell me I'm wrong, because I'm not /positive/ that this will be an avoidable problem in the future. Thanks to everyone for any suggestions they can offer. --joshua.
RE: gcc programming with qmail
i want to develop an application which can send mail through the qmail system. could you please give me a starting point of this? I would take advantage of qmail's sendmail compatibility. That is to say, do it just as though you were running sendmail, that way your code doesn't end up limited to qmail systems. --joshua.
RE: manymanymany splogger processes
Sorry about the long posting, but at least everythings in one place.
It seems to me that qmail-pop3d is not running correctly, thus explaining
the errors in /var/log/maillog, but is that also causing my splogger process
problem?
I just sent out a sizable mailing, so I expect the server to be busy and
working hard, but seriously... thousands of copies of splogger? Is it
/supposed/ to run a new instance for each outgoing message?
No, not at all. You are obviously doing something wrong. Please
provide more detail:
- how are you starting qmail
With supervise. I've added several key files below for a more complete
reference.
- how are you sending out the mailing
It's a perl script that uses sendmail, but it is the qmail replacement for
sendmail.
- are the splogger processes visibly doing something towards syslog
Well, /var/log/maillog has tons of these error messages:
May 22 11:31:57 nsc pop3d: 990545517.798654 tcpserver: fatal: unable to
bind: address already used
FILES:
/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send/run
---
#!/bin/sh
exec /var/qmail/rc
---
/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send/log/run
---
#!/bin/sh
exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t s250
/var/log/qmail/qmail-send
---
/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/run
---
#!/bin/sh
tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mail.nextstepcapital.net
/bin/ \
checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 21 |
/var/qmail/bin/splogger \
pop3d
---
/var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/log/run
---
#!/bin/sh
exec /usr/local/bin/setuidgid qmaill /usr/local/bin/multilog t s250
/var/log/qmail/qmail-pop3d
---
/etc/rc.d/init.d/qmail
---
#!/bin/sh -e
# /etc/init.d/qmail : start or stop the qmail mail subsystem.
# borrowed from http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#start-qmail
# modified by Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PATH=$PATH:/usr/local/bin:/var/qmail/bin
case $1 in
start)
echo -n Starting mail-transport-agent:
svc -u /var/qmail/supervise/*
echo -n qmail
svc -u /var/qmail/supervise/*/log
echo logging.
;;
stop)
echo -n Stopping mail-transport-agent:
echo -n qmail
svc -d /var/qmail/supervise/*
echo logging
svc -d /var/qmail/supervise/*/log
;;
restart)
$0 stop
$0 start
;;
reload|force-reload)
echo Reloading 'locals' and 'virtualdomains' control files.
svc -h /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-send
;;
*)
echo 'Usage: /etc/init.d/qmail {start|stop|restart|reload}'
exit 1
esac
exit 0
---
/etc/rc.local (partial)
---
/etc/init.d/svscan start
tcpserver 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mail.nextstepcapital.net \
/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir
---
RE: qmail and sqwebmail
-Original Message- From: Chris Hellberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 9:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: qmail and sqwebmail I've installed the two, but not with checkpassword, so take my advice with a grail of salt. It sounds as though no one has. Is there a way to install vpopmail without installing all of Courier? --joshua.
qmail and sqwebmail
I am trying to install sqwebmail on a server running qmail. I followed the (limited) installation documentation, and seem to have gotten it installed and partially running. qmail is installed and working correctly (as far as I can tell), as is qmail-pop3d. The sqwebmail documentation makes occasional references to vpopmail, which concerns me slightly considering the problem I'm having. I cannot login. I am using a functional account, but sqwebmail rejects the username/password. I know this does not provide you with much specific error data, but hopefully someone out there has tried this, and can tell me what I have to do to get the authentication working. Has anyone ever gotten this working with qmail-pop3d and checkpassword? Do I need to use a different pop server? Any assistance/direction would be greatly appreciated. --joshua.
RE: OT: where are you from
what does .to stand for, as in [EMAIL PROTECTED]? The island of Tonga. This could be a redundant reminder to many, but a few years back, Tonga realized that the four-or-so computers on their entire island did not really warrant a great need for domains. Hence, their governtment decided to start selling the somewhat attractive .to domain. I vaguely remember a follow up story in which they were able to pay off millions of dollars of debt to other countries from the proceeds of such sales. So, while a foo.to domain /could/ actually be from Tonga, chances are it belongs to some clever americans (go.to, iwant.to, etc). --joshua. DISCLAIMER: The use of hyperbole in this email should not be construed as any form of disrespect being shown or felt toward the people or government of Tonga. ;)
