Re: qmail complie error
On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 11:48:51AM -0600, tim wrote: # We need a little more information -- Justin Bell
Re: qmail speed solaris
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 08:00:38PM +0100, Michael Maier wrote: # What in my Situation is exactly. # The Messages are out of the todo queue. They should be sent out. But that # is too slow because # there are just so few qmail-remote Processes!!! They don't come up like # on Linux. # Just about 15-20. That's not much. On Linux it goes much higher. # And there appeared another Situation now. Because the queue Directory is # overloaded there are too many # fsyncs. But that is not the Main Issue because it's just the Effect of a # very overloaded queue. check the logfiles, see if there are process limit issues try upping the ulimit -- Justin Bell
Re: qmail speed improvement
On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 05:12:36PM +0100, Michael Maier wrote: # mean airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow? # # Dunno, gonna search on Google! :-) the correct response would be 'African or European?' -- Justin Bell
Re: 502 unimplemented
On Tue, Jan 23, 2001 at 10:49:33AM +0100, Stef Hoesli Wiederwald wrote: # sos:~ telnet QMAIL HOST 25 # Trying QMAIL HOST IP... You must have a much better version of telnet than I Here is what I get telnet QMAIL HOST IP Usage: telnet [-8] [-E] [-L] [-S tos] [-a] [-c] [-d] [-e char] [-l user] [-n tracefile] [-b hostalias ][-r] [host-name [port]] -- Justin Bell
Re: looking for mua
On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 07:47:46PM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote: # On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 07:28:15PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # # Hi, # # Is there any good MUA out there that supports Maildir format? I want to # get ride of pine because only has mbox. # # The three greatest: mutt, mutt and mutt. I should also mention mutt. From # these I'd use mutt ;-)) Mutt is pretty good also -- Justin Bell
qmtpd
Add epignosis.com to the qmtpd list
Re: Outlook Express Prank
On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 02:03:20PM -0500, Alex Pennace wrote: # On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 02:46:02PM -0300, martin langhoff wrote: # Please do be kind with your fellow admins even if they do things you # wouldn't do. Dropping a bomb such as that, *knowingly* is very # unfriendly. No one deserves being crashed by a prankster, and nobody is # expecting such uncivil behaviour in a technical list. # # No one deserves to be censored because some people made a poor choice # for their MUA. Also, how would we know what the string is had no one posted it? -- Justin Bell
Re: RCPTHOSTS Dilemma
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 04:37:43PM -0500, Anthony Abby wrote: # I'm having a problem with RCPTHOSTS and relaying. Without RCPTHOSTS (or # MORERCPTHOSTS) my mail server is an open relay, and yet I'm having # difficulty setting it up so that my Listserv (Listar), which runs on the # same box as QMail, can send out email to list subscribers? # # I have the following in rcpthosts: # # listserv.genexchange.com # listserv.genexchange.org # listserv.genexchange.net # # and I have the following in defaulthost # # listserv.genexchange.com # # I've read through the relaying tutorials linked to from the QMail website, # but didn't find anything addresses this point. I need to relay selectively # for mailing lists traffic, for not for anyone else... # # Any ideas? it sounds like you need to add localhost (127.0.0.1) to your relay hosts settings -- Justin Bell
Re: plusdomain
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 11:23:06AM -0400, Chris Moore wrote: # Can anyone tell me what the 'plusdomain' control file is used for? # Can't find anything in the docs...thanks. man qmail-control -- Justin Bell
Re: where..
you could try www.ezmlm.org and the ezmlm mailing list On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 05:30:42PM +0530, Anand Epuri wrote: # hi there, # # where can if find full info on ezmlm # # Anand # # # # _ # Do You Yahoo!? # Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com # -- Justin Bell
Re: relayclient
On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 02:58:46PM +0200, Mauro Tablo' wrote: # My goal is to block spamming through my host, allowing relay for my # customers. # Is there a way for doing that, without installing ucspi (and setting # relayclients in tcp.smtp file)? that information is in the FAQ file included in the source code -- Justin Bell
Re: Problems with RELAYCLIENT
if you are running qmail-smtpd from inetd.conf you need to read the FAQ that came with qmail on relaying. You need to modify the first inetd.conf entry shown in the install file. JB On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 03:23:48PM +0200, Leonard Tulipan wrote: # # # -Original Message- # From: Martin Jespersen [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] # Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 1:26 PM # To: Leonard Tulipan # Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' # Subject:Re: Problems with RELAYCLIENT # # just put the exchange server in your /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts file # and you should be fine :) # # /Martin # # # Nice idea, but it doesn't work. # I still get: 553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts # # I tried to send email from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] # So in theory the message is OK. # But I WANT our exchange server to be able to RELAY. # So the setting of the RELAYCLIENT variable doesn't seem to work. # any ideas of how to debug this? # # Could this also be related to Peter Green [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] who says # RedHat 6.2 is a bit weird (we upgraded the kernel to 2.2.17 though). Maybe # the exporting of the enviroment variable or tcp-env don't behave right. # # # Ciao # Leo -- Justin Bell
Re: Redhat 7
On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 02:20:22AM +0800, Mark Lo wrote: # Hi, # # Should I run qmail under Redhat Linux 7 or Redhat Linux 6.2?? # # Thank you for your suggestion, Debian -- Justin Bell
Re: Running Multiple Copies of Qmail on the same server...
On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 02:22:43AM +0200, Goran Blazic wrote: # I dont really see no good point on why you would want to run multiple copies # of qmail... # Or what you would understand by that ??!!?? # # Goran # comes in really handy when you have a list with 200,000 recipients, and you still need to relay mail for local users. If you setup ezmlm to use one instance, and you relay for local users, and accept bounces etc using the other then you won't have 4 hour delays between sending a single mail to a single recip anywhere near as often -- Justin Bell
Re: Volunteers for a multilog patch?
On 05 20, Dave Sill wrote: # Peter Samuel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # # On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Dave Sill wrote: # # It's like comparing America # to Australia. Why do America have to make everything back-to-front # for us? # # Such as? # # I'll bite that one. Here's my short list off the top of my head. # # Brett implied that the US was intentionally being different. I think # your examples are perfectly typical international differences. # # - we each drive on different sides of the road # # US and Canada do it one way. UK and Australia do it the other. There's # no clear international standard. Ahh, but the reason the US drives on the other side of the road is because the UK doesn't! It makes life hell for kids who have been taught to look right, left, right again # - we tell time differently, eg quarter past 9 vs quarter after # nine # # Same difference. can someone please tell me what Quarter of nine means, is it a quarter til, quarter past? # - North American light switches are up for on, but in Oz they are # down for on. # # They toggle, for Peter's sake! If it's dark, flip the danged switch # and see if it gets brighter. Sheesh. :-) Actually, this one got me too I thought the bulb was out # - Australian power points (or power outlets if you don't know what # I'm talking about) all have switches on the outlet itself, not at # the wall. # # Oh, that's *handy*...walk into a room and fumble behind the furniture # looking for the light switch. Gee, I can't imagine why we put them on # the wall... No, Power outlets, not light switches... the power outlets have switches at the outlet... # - typically, North Americans have a North American centric view of # the world, while people in Oz tend to be, on the whole, more aware # of the rest of the world. (I know, a sweeping generalisation and North # Americans have improved greatly since I first encountered them on # mass in 1978). # # Of course we have a North Amercian centric view of the world: we're # the most powerful and important country in the world. If we were a # backwater like Canada or Australia, we'd be paying a lot more # attention to other countries like the US, too. Oh, and US citizens are about as arrogant as the French ;) -- Justin Bell
Re: BestWinblozeMailClient
Eudora isn't too bad, and the sponsored mode lets you use multiple POP/IMAP accounts etc On 04 21, Jos Okhuijsen wrote: # Hi Jan Brett # # Right, messenger is nice. It drops short on 1 major for us: # Trying to add a second pop account: "You can have multiple # mail servers if they are IMAP servers. You are now using a pop # server" While inside we could go POP, i can't change the outside # offerings, and they aren't POP. # # To be honest: Many years ago i tried to get GNUS up and running, # and i am still recovering from the dent in my self esteem after giving up. # It was simply too damm difficult. But he, i'll give it a try once more, # and try to create a workable setup for my users. That with a standard # install could be a worthwile proposition. # # Regards, # # Jos # # # -- Justin Bell
Re: hosts not known by DNS
On 13 06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # Hiho! # # I need to send emails from a host S that uses qmail as a MTA for sending # special emails to a special host R that is not known by DNS. Usually the # host S sends all his outgoing mail traffic to a mail hub. # # Our maintenance company says that qmail is unable to send mails to this # host in this setting. # # Is there an easier way, than writing an own mail client that is used by the # program on host S that needs to send mails to this special host R, to solve # our problem? # # Bye # Arne Here's a simple way in your smtproutes file in /var/qmail/control (if there is no such file create it) add the line R:ip address of R :mail router -- Justin Bell
Re: Timezone
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 08:01:36PM -0700, Eric Cox wrote: # "Stephen F. Bosch" wrote: # # Daniel Augusto Fernandes wrote: # # Yes, I agree with the MUA being responsible for doing the translation. # But some doesn't do that. # # Like Mickeysoft's Outlook Excess, for example. Outlook is not standards # compliant. # What you're essentially asking for a way to break qmail so that it will # work with Microsoft's mediocre product. =) # # Actually neither Netscape 4.72 nor Pine 4.10 do it either. # # Anyone know of an MUA that _does_ translate the Date: header? Mutt, Eudora -- Justin Bell
reverse DNS
What does not having reverse DNS really mean when it comes to a mail server? We are moving our server from a machine WITH reverse DNS at our old ISP, to a machine in house that reverse DNS cant be set right now due to a messup at ARIN. How many servers really reject mail based on reverse? This is a mailing list host. Thanks, Justin -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Justin Bell Pearson PTC Get money back when shopping online Programmer http://www.ebates.com/index.jhtml?referrer=jaymz Get $20 FREE! https://preview.x.com/new_account.asp?[EMAIL PROTECTED] Get $10 FREE https://secure.paypal.com/refer/pal=justin%40iquest.net Get paid to surf the web http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=FBH998
Re: this dam(N)(ED) list
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 04:04:53PM -0400, Nagendra Mishr wrote: # Also, if EZMLM had mail merge and a list # footer, then you can mail merge the delivery address in the footer of # every message. it would also create many thousands of more email messages, instead of one message for many it would need to generate a message for each memeber of a list.
Re: this dam(N)(ED) list
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 05:36:05PM -0500, Dustin Marquess wrote: # At 03:08 PM 10/20/99 , Justin Bell wrote: # On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 04:04:53PM -0400, Nagendra Mishr wrote: # # Also, if EZMLM had mail merge and a list # # footer, then you can mail merge the delivery address in the footer of # # every message. # # it would also create many thousands of more email messages, instead of one # message for many it would need to generate a message for each memeber of a # list. # # This happens anyways... That's how VERP works. Look at the # Return-Path: header of any email you get from this list... I guess I should have been more specific, it creates onemessage in the mail queue, instead of hundreds or thousands. -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: newline patch for qmail
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 10:27:54PM +0200, Markus Stumpf wrote: # On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 03:17:19PM -0500, Ken Jones wrote: # Can anyone point me to the newline patch for qmail. # www.qmail.org says: # Daniel J. Bernstein suggests that if you have buggy clients that send # bare LFs, and you want to treat their messages the same way sendmail # does, you can simply run sh -c 'fixcr | qmail-smtpd' for your outgoing # mail relay. # # Hope that helps, # of course, the socket doesnt get closed at the end of a message then so the mailer things it's a problem if you are using cold fusion, for one. -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Lobby mail.com
Hi Nathan, Thanks for the response. I have received one mail from Mail.com and that was the one claiming my machine may be an open relay, and of course it isn't, that was a few days ago now. I have not heard back from several messages sent since, and I need this machine unblacklisted ASAP as the many different domains that mail.com et al use are too numerous to keep track of and route through other machines, and many of our subscribers are being dropped from the lists through no fault of their own. WHat can I do to get this resolved? Thanks, Justin Bell On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 04:16:07PM -0400, Nathan J. Mehl wrote: # # Oy. Guess I get to delurk now. # # Hi, my name is Nathan J. Mehl. I run qmail on my home system, # blank.org. # # I also happen to be the Senior Systems Administrator for Mail.Com. # # Let me state this for the record: # # MAIL.COM DOES NOT, NEVER HAS, AND NEVER WILL BLACKLIST SERVERS BASED # ON THE http://maps.vix.com/tsi/new-rlytest.cgi SCRIPT. # # I'm afraid that the message sent by the abuse staff at Mail.Com to Mr. # Bell was somewhat unclear. iq-ss5.iquest.net was blocked because we # received an unexpectedly high volume of mail from it. Period. The # speculation that it was an open relay was just that, speculation, and # we provided the pointer to the vix.com relay tester as a courtesy to # Mr. Bell. # # Here is the crux of the matter: we would have blacklisted the server # even if it had "passed" the TSI Relay Test. # # Allow me to offer my apologies to Mr. Bell for the inconvenience # suffered. And please don't flood our abuse desk with requests to stop # something we never did; they're busy enough as it is. :) # # -n # # [EMAIL PROTECTED] # SENDING JUNK EMAIL TO MY ADDRESS CONSTITUTES YOUR LEGALLY-BINDING ACCEPTANCE # OF MY OFFER TO REMOVE BOTH OF YOUR NIPPLES WITH AN ORBITAL SANDER. # (--Andy Ihnatko) # http://www.blank.org/memory/ -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Lobby mail.com
# MAIL.COM DOES NOT, NEVER HAS, AND NEVER WILL BLACKLIST SERVERS BASED # ON THE http://maps.vix.com/tsi/new-rlytest.cgi SCRIPT. # # I'm afraid that the message sent by the abuse staff at Mail.Com to Mr. # Bell was somewhat unclear. iq-ss5.iquest.net was blocked because we # received an unexpectedly high volume of mail from it. Period. The # speculation that it was an open relay was just that, speculation, and # we provided the pointer to the vix.com relay tester as a courtesy to # Mr. Bell. # # Here is the crux of the matter: we would have blacklisted the server # even if it had "passed" the TSI Relay Test. # # Well, that clears up one issue, but raises another. In the nature of # things, mail.com is likely to get lots of mail from certain servers -- # those hosting mailing lists, those belonging to other big email # providers. My server, for example, hosts one fairly large monthly # newsletter that has over 1000 subscribers at hotmail.com. (Only # something like 12 at mail.com, or I'd be using you for the example). # So, each month when that goes out, hotmail.com will receive a big # batch of emails from me. If that list had 1000 subscribers at # mail.com, would you have blacklisted me? Yes, they probably would have, of the mail.com etc. domains that they host, one of our three daily large volume lists has the following breakdown: List Total: 46633 iname.com 100 .iname.com 100 altavista.net 12 cheerful.com 20 cybergal.com 7 email.com 64 financier.com 1 iname.com 100 indiamail.com 1 innocent.com 3 mail.com4352 mail.org 5 mindless.com 16 nightly.com 1 null.net 2 rocketship.com 1 scotlandmail.com 1 seductive.com 1 techie.com 2 unforgettable.com 5 usa.com 59 writeme.com 35 All these people requested to be on this list. So, because your customers want to receive these emails you find it necessary to block us? -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: The word from Mail.com
On Wed, Sep 01, 1999 at 01:22:32PM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote: # A friend with some clout contacted mail.com and reports: # # They claim that they do not block based on relaytest, but they do refer to it # and some people may mistakenly believe that's the reason. # # So there you have it. If you're being blocked by Mail.com, it's not # because you failed rlytest because of a sendmail-specific test. # From: "Mail.com Abuse" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 22:09:54 -0400 To: Justin Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: blacklisted? Justin On Thu Jul 15, we received a high volume of traffic from 206.246.140.165 (iq-ss5.iquest.net). Specifically, we got 472 messages in an hour. If you check http://maps.vix.com/tsi/new-rlytest.cgi?ADDR=iq-ss5.iquest.net you will see that this machine is an open relay. We therefore blocked it. If you secure this machine, we will be glad to unblock it. as can be seen here, no, they did not claim that that is why it was blacklisted, but that the host is an open relay. of course, their own mail servers do not get past test TWO themselves. -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: The word from Mail.com
On Wed, Sep 01, 1999 at 12:44:22PM -0700, Ben Kosse wrote: # From: "Mail.com Abuse" [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 22:09:54 -0400 # To: Justin Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Subject: Re: blacklisted? # # Justin # # On Thu Jul 15, we received a high volume of traffic from # 206.246.140.165 # (iq-ss5.iquest.net). Specifically, we got 472 messages in # an hour. If you # check # http://maps.vix.com/tsi/new-rlytest.cgi?ADDR=iq-ss5.iquest.net you # will see that this machine is an open relay. We therefore # blocked it. If # you secure this machine, we will be glad to unblock it. # # as can be seen here, no, they did not claim that that is why it was # blacklisted, but that the host is an open relay. # # of course, their own mail servers do not get past test TWO themselves. # # I'd like to point out that they're saying, based solely on the failure of # test 7, they claim that iq-ss5.iquest.net is an open relay and thus needs # blocking. exactly! If that did not get across the first time, they are blocking my mail server because it fails test 7, of course, I have since added [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the badmailfrom which lets the machine pass all the tests Justin -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Mail.com blacklisting
OK, so Mail.com and all it's domains have in their infinite wisdon have decided to blacklist me due to the fact that http://maps.vix.com/tsi/new-rlytest.cgi?ADDR=iq-ss5.iquest.net shows my machine as a possible relay, and because my machine processes at least 80,000 mailing list recipients per day and they received 472 messages in one hour. Any idea on how to make it look secure? Justin -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Justin Bell Pearson PTC Get money back when shopping online Programmer http://www.ebates.com/index.jhtml?referrer=jaymz
Re: Bare LF problem
On Thu, Jun 10, 1999 at 11:50:21AM +0200, Stefan Paletta wrote: # Eric S . wrote/schrieb/scribsit: # On Wed, 9 Jun 1999, A.Y. Sjarifuddin wrote: # # tcpserver params 'fixcr|qmail-smtpd' 21 | cyclog... # ... I think. Just replace "qmail-smtpd" with "'fixcr|qmail-smtpd'". # # That didn't work. Any other suggestions? # # Replace 'qmail-smtpd' with 'sh -c "fixcr|qmail-smtpd"'. # does anyone else have problems with that no closing the connection? "Error","TID=1","06/10/99","10:33:28","Error occurred while attempting to close connection. - [PT_ERROR] General error (Timed out while waiting for SMTP command to complete) - " "Error","TID=1","06/10/99","10:34:29","Error occurred while attempting to close connection. - [PT_ERROR] General error (Timed out while waiting for SMTP command to complete) - " -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Bare LF problem
On Thu, Jun 10, 1999 at 10:58:08AM -0500, wrote: # Yes! I've observed ColdFusion erroring this way whether relaying # through qmail or sendmail, though. I think this is a ColdFusion # problem. Search of the Cold Fusion archives mentions this problem, but # not the cause (Well, it's an SMTP error.) or solution. # # -Original Message- # From: Justin Bell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] # Sent: Thursday, June 10, 1999 10:36 AM # To: Qmail Mailing List # Subject: Re: Bare LF problem # # # On Thu, Jun 10, 1999 at 11:50:21AM +0200, Stefan Paletta wrote: # # Eric S . wrote/schrieb/scribsit: # # On Wed, 9 Jun 1999, A.Y. Sjarifuddin wrote: # # # # tcpserver params 'fixcr|qmail-smtpd' 21 | cyclog... # # ... I think. Just replace "qmail-smtpd" with # "'fixcr|qmail-smtpd'". # # # # That didn't work. Any other suggestions? # # # # Replace 'qmail-smtpd' with 'sh -c "fixcr|qmail-smtpd"'. # # # # does anyone else have problems with that no closing the connection? # "Error","TID=1","06/10/99","10:33:28","Error occurred while attempting # to # close connection. - [PT_ERROR] General error (Timed out while waiting # for # SMTP command to complete) - " # "Error","TID=1","06/10/99","10:34:29","Error occurred while attempting # to # close connection. - [PT_ERROR] General error (Timed out while waiting # for # SMTP command to complete) - " when I telnet to port 25 it also does NOT close the connection after I hit quit -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: rcpthosts
On Fri, Jun 04, 1999 at 05:07:08PM -0400, Robert Schader wrote: # You would think that the rcpthosts file could serve a better purpose by # allowing the machines listed in it to send anywhere, instead of any machine # out on the internet to only send files to the machines in rcpthosts, which # in the case of the same information being in locals, serves no purpose # that I can see. # the rcpthosts and locals files are not duplicate information. If you want to run virtualhosts they must be in the rcpthosts, virtualdomains files and NOT in locals. # I do have the info from the FAQ on selectively allowing certain hosts # to set RELAYHOST and am going to try implementing that, otherwise I am # going to add the user/password auth patch for qmail-smtpd from nimh.org # since I ultimately need that for offsite POP access. the RELAYCLIENT client method is the best way to have local machines use your host as the SMTP relay. -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: HELP: root can't get mail.....
qmail will not deliver mail to the root account, following the instructions from the INSTALL file you need to setup a file in the ~alias directory called .qmail-root, either an empty file, which will save mail in the ~alias account, or file containing [EMAIL PROTECTED] to forward root mail to someone else. Justin On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 05:33:57PM +0200, Bruno Boettcher wrote: # Hello, # # strange thing: as it seems root can't get mail: # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.461259 info msg 4064: bytes 501 from # [EMAIL PROTECTED] qp 10976 uid 0 # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.555195 starting delivery 18439: msg 4064 # t o local [EMAIL PROTECTED] # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.555313 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.621024 delivery 18439: failure: # Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/ # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.621160 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.662618 bounce msg 4064 qp 10979 # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.662926 end msg 4064 # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.663387 new msg 4361 # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.663611 info msg 4361: bytes 1066 from # qp 10979 uid 72 # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.721585 starting delivery 18440: msg 4361 # to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.721742 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.725045 delivery 18440: failure: # Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/ # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.725411 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.786842 bounce msg 4361 qp 10981 # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.787024 end msg 4361 # May 16 06:51:43 erm1 qmail: 926830303.787440 new msg 4064 # # what did i do wrong? this lines are filling the logs and explode /var. # # ciao # bboett # == # acount at earthling net # http://erm6.u-strasbg.fr/~bboett # === # Unsolicited commercial email is NOT welcome at this email address # To contact me replace acount by bboett in above addresses # -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Bare LF problem
On Tue, May 18, 1999 at 11:09:18PM +0200, Balazs Nagy wrote: # On Tue, 18 May 1999, John Gonzalez/netMDC admin wrote: # # The question is now how to fix it. # # A very good answer is at the tips and advice section at # http://www.qmail.org/top.html by Dan himself. A tricky and cool # answer actually. is that the fixcr pipe? one problem with that is that it doesn't terminate the session correctly, the socket never closes after the quit command is issued, at least on my Solaris box at iq-ss5.iquest.net port 80025 -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: taildir won't compile...
anyone get it to work on Solaris 2.5? gcc taildir.c Undefined first referenced symbol in file alphasort /var/tmp/cca001nR1.o scandir /var/tmp/cca001nR1.o ld: fatal: Symbol referencing errors. No output written to a.out On Thu, May 13, 1999 at 02:26:47PM -0400, Adam D. McKenna wrote: # It compiled fine for me with no warnings on Debian 2.1. Maybe your headers # are outdated. # # --Adam # # - Original Message - # From: Jeff Hayward [EMAIL PROTECTED] # To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Sent: Thursday, May 13, 1999 12:33 PM # Subject: Re: taildir won't compile... # # # : On Thu, 13 May 1999, Marlon Anthony Abao wrote: # : # :mail:~$ cc taildir.c # :taildir.c:15: conflicting types for `sys_errlist' # :/usr/include/errno.h:31: previous declaration of `sys_errlist' # :taildir.c: In function `newest': # :taildir.c:65: warning: passing arg 3 of `scandir' from incompatible # pointer # :type # :taildir.c:65: warning: passing arg 4 of `scandir' from incompatible # pointer # :type # : # :am using linux... is there a problem with it? # : # : It compiles with 1 warning (which can be ignored) for me. Which # : Linux are you using? I've got RH 6.0 # : # : % uname -v -s -r -m # : Linux 2.2.5-15 #1 Mon Apr 19 23:00:46 EDT 1999 i686 # : # : % cc -o taildir taildir.c # : taildir.c: In function `newest': # : taildir.c:65: warning: passing arg 3 of `scandir' from incompatible # : pointer type # : # : % ./taildir . (sleep 1; echo "Hello, world" @02; sleep 3) # : [2] 1380 # : Hello, world # : # : # : -- Jeff # : # : # : # # -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: RH 6.0 upgrade and pine
On Fri, May 07, 1999 at 10:42:11AM -0500, Mate Wierdl wrote: # Another funny thing is that the 6.0 upgrade moved my pine.conf to # pine.conf.rpmsave, and replaced it with *nothing*. Funny, funny... # I hope you are reporting these problems to RedHat -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: qmail is not a replacement for sendmail
On Thu, Apr 29, 1999 at 12:09:28PM +0100, Chris Green wrote: # But I keep saying - not everyone who installs and runs a Linux box # nowadays is going to have the sort of knowledge many of the people on # this list seem to assume. It's just not going to happen I'm afraid so # a little more help and warnings in the qmail documentation would not # go amiss. then they shouldnt be installing it then it's THAT simple -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: qmail is not a replacement for sendmail
On Thu, Apr 29, 1999 at 01:22:51PM +0100, Chris Green wrote: # The problem is that there is no simple alternative which one can # recommend for the SoHo environment. The reason I chose to install # qmail on my home system was that the general opinion in places I # looked was that it was the simplest/easiest MTA to install. Given # this and the fact that one has to install *some* sort of MUA where # else is the naive new Linux user supposed to go? sendmail should suit the needs of the home user just fine, and it comes installed on most Linux distributions -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: qmail is not a replacement for sendmail
On Thu, Apr 29, 1999 at 04:26:03PM +0100, Chris Green wrote: # On Thu, Apr 29, 1999 at 10:00:45AM -0500, Justin Bell wrote: # On Thu, Apr 29, 1999 at 01:22:51PM +0100, Chris Green wrote: # I'm not knocking qmail (it's excellent and works very well for me) but # just trying to point out that a little more help for users of small # systems who aren't full time sysadmins would be very welcome. There's # no ideal MTA for small (unix/linux) systems, all the existing ones are # trying to be the best for big systems IMHO. Given this lack of MTA # for small systems qmail will be the MTA of choice for quite a few # people who need a bit more hand holding than is easily available at # present. Qmail is not the best solution for small users in some instances, multiple messages sent per message, etc. If you think the docs for small systems needs to be better, there is nothing stopping you from writing them -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Qmail is not a replacement for Sendmail
On Thu, Apr 29, 1999 at 04:35:20PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # Julian L.C. Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 29 April 1999 at 17:20:29 -0400 # # Most companies have someone dedicated to the task of looking after # email - and if this is not your company you should look towards # Micro$oft for buggy, low grade help. # # I don't know what planet you come from; On the planet *I* come from, I # know how the internals work at an ISP, a non-profit, a division of a # big company (used to be independent), and a startup (3 years old, # about 35 people). *None* of these have anybody devoted full-time to # looking after email. All of them run their own MTAs. I know the internals of an ISP, a multi mational, and a university all have at least 1 person full time doing email -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Qmail is not a replacement for Sendmail
# Should you install qmail ? # --- # # First of all, consider these: # # * You have to deinstall sendmail before starting to install qmail. While # installing # qmail, you won't be able to do mail. Also, you will probably make quite some # changes to your fs, which makes it hard to just give up and reinstall # sendmail. this is completely untrue, the docs tell you to KEEP SENDMAIL RUNNING while you install qmail # * Qmail is probably also more inviting to hackers, just because it's more # human. The 1000 dollar reward for hacking qmail was never claimed # But here are some of the things you're going to face: # # - qmail doesn't do /var/spool/mail. it tries to keep # the mailboxes in the users' homedirectories (which is better). If you want # to do that, # move all your mbox files to the users' homedirs .. there u go. If you don't # want that, # read a whole lot of docs before you install qmail. you SHOULD read a whole lot of docs before you install qmail anyway! # -in fact, qmail-pop3d doesn't do any mbox format, it wants # to use the Maildir format (which really is better). If you want to use # that, you should # convert all your mbox files to maildirs ... someway. In the package, there # is a tool # supplied to do the reverse: MailDir to Mbox files :-) # # - qmail-pop3d doesn't work without a passwordchecker. you need to get it # somewhere # online and change some lines in some initfiles to get it working. # # If all of the above 2 things scare you, don't use qmail-pop3d...you need to # use some # other popdeamon and get it to cooporate with qmail. There's a techy bit # And then you're not really 'running qmail', you're just using some bits of # the qmail package. Things may get tricky when all the bugs arrive and you # need to update. that is complete BS sendmail does NOT have a pop daemon, never has POP is COMPLETELY independent of MTA use your head # -qmail doesn't do .forward files, it uses .qmail files (which are better). # If you want # to use them, edit and rename all .forward files ... ... there u go. # There's also a patch (dotforward) for using .forward files. dotforward works fine # -qmail doesn't read /etc/aliases. It reads info from /var/qmail/ (which is # better). # ...you get the point. Yes, there is a patch (fastforward) to run if you # want /etc/aliases. fastforward works WONDERFULLY # Things were still not working and I had to invent complex workarounds. # A lot of handwork ... a week later, I had to do it all over again, to try # and fix it. # The users got funny errors and received all the mail they left on # the server several times even on such a small system as mine, # it was HELL. you should install on a test box before you attempt the real thing! that is common sense # Sendmail, after all, was working fine. until the next security hole is found
Re: Qmail is not a replacement for Sendmail
# # First of all, consider these: # # * You have to deinstall sendmail before starting to install qmail. # this is completely untrue, the docs tell you to KEEP SENDMAIL RUNNING while # you install qmail # # true ! thanks. I installed from an RPM - see Martin's mail. As far as I know, installing the RPM is NOT a good way of installing Qmail and is unspported # # If all of the above 2 things scare you, don't use qmail-pop3d...you need to # # use some # # other popdeamon and get it to cooporate with qmail. There's a techy bit # # And then you're not really 'running qmail', you're just using some bits of # # the qmail package. Things may get tricky when all the bugs arrive and you # # need to update. # # that is complete BS # # sendmail does NOT have a pop daemon, never has # POP is COMPLETELY independent of MTA # use your head # # OK..so why call it qmail-pop3d and ship it with the package ? # It looks to me as if the Qmail gods intented me to use the tool # to pop. Sure, use anything else .. be creative .. why NOT? you can still use the pop server you currently have setup # Question is: can you sell qmail as a cool tool to a moron like # me who just popped a RedHat CD out of a box ? Because really, # this _is_ the way it's presented, at http://www.qmail.org no, it isn't you need to READ the WHOLE docs # you should install on a test box before you attempt the real thing! # that is common sense # # That would be a nice warning on the qmail homepage ! what? common sense??? # [snip] # dotforward works fine # [snip] # fastforward works WONDERFULLY # # I'm very happy for you, but if it don't work # here and it does work there... # ...what's the use of barfing ? then keep trying until it DOES work! like EVERYONE else does and get rid of the STUPID mac signature it shows up as control characters -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: After qmail install mail is broken
On Wed, Apr 28, 1999 at 01:37:57PM +1000, Stephen Lavelle wrote: # Having recently installed qmail (and uninstalled sendmail) on a RH 2.0.36 # box. The following happens; # Fetchmail appears to fetch from my isp ok # when I open pine to read mail I get the message: # 'can't open mailbox; /home/stephen/Folder # where are my messages? # Can anyone help? # Regards, # Stephen doesnt anyone read the INSTALL files -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: inetd-smtp/tcp problem
On Fri, Apr 23, 1999 at 08:26:53AM -0700, Brian D. Kohl wrote: # Hey all, # # So I have a new qmail install here at my new company. Threw out Exchange # before it was even set up, though after they had paid for it. No worries. # # I have Qmail running as it should, been great since last Friday when I set # it up, but yesterday I had 3 seperate events of the following error (as # logged in /var/log/messages): # # Apr 22 12:02:43 mailsf inetd[256]: smtp/tcp server failing (looping), # service terminated this is a common problem, inetd thinks it is being helpful the best advice is to install tcpserver, its fixed all my problems -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
BARE LF, again
what is considered the BEST method of accepting bare LFs patching smtpd? putting fixcr in the pipeline, and what would be the best way to do that? Thanks
Re: Question regarding - in aliases.
# I don't really need .forward, I just need the - thing to be turned off. # Would the above turn off - processing? # nip-nt in /etc/aliases doesn't work. # nipnt in /etc/aliases does work. # The user nip exists what you can do is if the user nip is not using any .qmail-file files, add a line to /var/qmail./users/assign +nip-:alias:uid:gid::-:: and then alias will handle them # # Then check /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-default. Its contents should # be something like: # # | fastforward -d /etc/aliases.cdb # # This is working. I added [EMAIL PROTECTED] and it worked perfectly. (right # under the other alias that isn't working) # # Greg # # -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: ezmlm and delay notifies (was: Re: mini-bounce)
On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 06:13:15PM -0500, Scott Schwartz wrote: # Peter van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: # | But yes, it would consider these warnings as bounces. # # It also considers vacation messages to be bounces. :-( # but vacation messages shouldnt be replying to list email, right? -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: rewriting to: addresses
On Thu, Mar 11, 1999 at 02:24:11PM -0500, Adam D. McKenna wrote: # Right. We've already done that. But some users were not duplicates, so # they were given regular usernames. I will be putting in .qmail files for # all the duplicates, but I need some way to use .qmail-default to rewrite the # To: domain for those that aren't duplicates. I.E. if there is no other # qmail file to process the message, convert [EMAIL PROTECTED] to # [EMAIL PROTECTED], and process the mail from there. # .qmail-oldisp-default |forward "$LOCAL"@whatever.org # --Adam # # -Original Message- # From: xs [EMAIL PROTECTED] # To: Adam D. McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Date: Thursday, March 11, 1999 2:18 PM # Subject: Re: rewriting to: addresses # # # : # :i had a similar situation when we bought another isp here, # :what we had to do was create a virtualhost entry for the other isp, and # :for each user create a .qmail-reefnet-username (we bought reefnet). and # :for duplicates, give them a new username to use for dialing up, but tell # :them they could keep their email addy. we had to do this with about 10 # :users, and it worked out ok. # : # :later # : # : # : # :end # :- # :Greg Albrecht Safari Internet # :System Administrator Fort Lauderdale, FL # :[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.safari.net # : +1[888|954]537-9550 # :- # : # :On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, Adam D. McKenna wrote: # : # :An ISP I am working for recently bought another ISP. Some of the # usernames # :they are importing are the same as users they currently have on the # system. # :If there is duplication of usernames, we are going to create new accounts, # :username.nn and forward the mail to them using .qmail files. What I want # to # :do is, if the username is unique, the mail can just be forwarded to that # :username. Can I do this with a .qmail-domain-default alias? It should be # :just a rewrite of the domain in the To: field. # : # :I was thinking I could do something just using a |forward, is this # possible? # : # :--Adam # : # : # : # : # : # : # # -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
non-resolving domain name patch
I just searched thorugh the archive looking for the Has anyone written a patch for Qmail 1.0.3 to reject mail if envelope sender domain can't be resolved? Funny you should ask, not 15 minutes ago I upgraded to 1.0.3 using such a patch. You want the patches from Jonathan Bradshaw mentioned on www.qmail.org. --- I cant seem to find this patch on the site... anyone? -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Qmail mailing list and ReplyTo:
On Fri, Feb 19, 1999 at 08:53:51AM -0500, Peter Green wrote: # On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, Rok Papez wrote: # I also moderate a mailing list where most people use PMMail and # mailing list sets the Reply-To. There has been only 1 (!) mistake # when someone replied to the mailing list instead of privately. # # Try subscribing to the inet-access mailing list. They set the Reply-To: to # the list, and it's nearly 2-5 times per day that someone accidentally # posts a private response to the list. now that is really strange I am on a list for something completely non technical, shadowrun, and it is VERY rare that someone sends a message to the list that was supposed to be private. Also everyone complains when a reply-to is passed on from their MUA as to reply to them, as it makes it hard to reply to the list. -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Qmail mailing list and ReplyTo:
On Sat, Feb 20, 1999 at 09:42:45AM -0500, Greg Owen {gowen} wrote:
# Um, no. Everybody honors Reply-To. The problem is that most MUAs
#
# Not quite everybody. cc:Mail (at least some versions) completely
# ignores it.
that killed on the MTA level
--
/- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\
|Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. |
|Pearson| Attention span is quickening.|
|Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. |
\ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Qmail mailing list and ReplyTo:
On Fri, Feb 19, 1999 at 02:43:46PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # #Exactly my point.. If you took your time and read (instead of scanning) #the message before replying, those "Ups I posted a private mail to the #mailing #list" mistakes wouldn't hapen with "Reply-To:" field set to the #mailinglist #address # # Using stock Unix /bin/mail, try to reply to this message without sending # yourself a copy. Take your time, and have fun. # how could he do that, he had to delete /bin/mail when he installed qmail -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: syslog.mail
On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 11:23:22PM +0100, Peter van Dijk wrote: # On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 01:29:42PM -0800, Samuel Dries-Daffner wrote: # # How can I move the syslog.mail file and make a new one safely? # # The one I have is 62 MB and represents about 15% of our root partition. # # Thanks in advance for any help on this :) # # mv syslog.mail syslog.mail.1 # killall -HUP syslogd # I know this is good intentions and all, but please don't advise people to use the killall command unless you KNOW exactly what it does on their system. here is a snippet from the man page for my killall (Solaris) killall(1M) Maintenance Commandskillall(1M) NAME killall - kill all active processes SYNOPSIS /usr/sbin/killall [ signal ] AVAILABILITY SUNWcsu DESCRIPTION killall is used by shutdown(1M) to kill all active processes not directly related to the shutdown procedure. killall terminates all processes with open files so that the mounted file systems will be unbusied and can be unmounted. killall sends signal (see kill(1)) to the active processes. If no signal is specified, a default of 15 is used. The killall command can be run only by the super-user. SEE ALSO kill(1), ps(1), fuser(1M), shutdown(1M), signal(3C) /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: ORBS Returns
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 11:46:06AM -0600, Mate Wierdl wrote: # #:RCPT TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] #:553 sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1) #:MAIL TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] #:503 one MAIL per message (#5.5.1) # # I do not get this in 1.03 anymore (I can specify as many MAIL as I want). # correct, but it seems that ever MAIL command clears the queue/whatever in the session, and every MAIL argument seems to be interpreted asa MAIL FROM: -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Receiving Mail
On Tue, Jan 12, 1999 at 04:30:43AM +, Tim Croppere wrote: # My host name is: mail.somewhere.org and is in control/me # # I want to be able to receive mail for: [EMAIL PROTECTED] # # What is the proper way to accomplish this? # by reading the documentation you need to install qmail, make it so that qmail-smtpd receives mail on port 25. setup MX records to point to your hostname for somewhere.org do a jig add somewhere.org in control/rcpthosts and control/locals and read the documenation, this is ELEMENTARY and is well documented. -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: pine and qmail-inject
On Sat, Jan 09, 1999 at 10:19:19AM +0530, Mohanan P G wrote: # Hi, # # Well.. # I thought sendmail in /var/qmail/bin was only a temporary measure # or so and I was supposed to use qmail-inject finally. I could not # figure out how. I might not have understood the design well. # Please correct me if I am wrong. # As it is pine works well and all of my 2000 users are happy after # I have switched over to qmail ( We were using sendmail-8.8.12 # earlier). # Thank you for the fast response. # --pgm I was under the impression the sendmail util in the qmail bin directory was pretty much a permanent things, well, as permanent as anything can be. For compatibility the best thing to do, like in the INSTALL docs is to put a symlink to it in the original position of sendmail on your system. usually /usr/lib/sendmail Well, I could be wrong though
Re: pine and qmail-inject
On Sat, Jan 09, 1999 at 09:55:44AM +0530, Mohanan P G wrote: # Hello, # We are using qmail-v1.03 and pine 4.04 in RedhatLinux 5.2 for our # mailing. pinerc has "sendmail -oem -oi -t" in its sendmail-path # and sendmail is a link to /var/qmail/bin/sendmail. Is there any # way to use qmail-inject instead ? # Thanks in advance. # --pgm why? -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Pearson| Attention span is quickening.| |Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Size limit on relayed message?
On Tue, Jan 05, 1999 at 08:20:49PM +, Sam wrote: # # Can I restrict relaying based on size of relayed mail? # # I run qmail 1.03 and I want to prohibit my users from sending like 30M+ # messages out through my server. this message came through just fine before, now it's got all these control messages in it, what's up? -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Simon Schuster AAT | Attention span is quickening.| |Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: qmail II request
On Mon, Jan 04, 1999 at 12:39:33AM +, Paul Gregg wrote: # In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: # # Your points may be valid and correct, but you only echoed what was originally # stated anyway. The "To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" IS part of the body, not the RCPT # TO: The [EMAIL PROTECTED] stuff started when someone else said they'd like # to bounce that too, but I just answered that. # # I echoed what others had said, yes. But I had to pull it all together because # people were not grasping what was actually going on. # # Since I started this thread I can tell you without question what it's about # and [EMAIL PROTECTED] isn't any part of it. I want to reject mail being # sent to certain valid usernames, such as my database. I'd also like to bounce # some mail to nonvalid usernames without accepting and bouncing afterward since # they only double bounce anyway. # # To do this, then it requires qmail-smtpd to know everything that qmail-send # does. It requires a major rethink and rewriting of the qmail system. # We'll have to see what dbj comes up with for Qmail-II - we know that many of # us would like to see such a feature. no, it wouldnt invalid usernames would be dfined in a file, and would then be not accepted admin defined user named # The problem with accepting and trashing the messages is that if mail is sent # to the database (ferinstance) I'd have to filter out what is junk mail and # what's valid - like cron results. # # If you are in control of the local delivery then you already can control # who sends mail to your database. Why can't you use procmail? not every machine has procmail, or wants to run procmail -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Simon Schuster AAT | Attention span is quickening.| |Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: qmail II request
On Mon, Jan 04, 1999 at 01:04:51AM +, Paul Gregg wrote: # In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: # Since I started this thread I can tell you without question what it's about # and [EMAIL PROTECTED] isn't any part of it. I want to reject mail being # sent to certain valid usernames, such as my database. I'd also like to bounce # some mail to nonvalid usernames without accepting and bouncing afterward since # they only double bounce anyway. # # To do this, then it requires qmail-smtpd to know everything that qmail-send # does. It requires a major rethink and rewriting of the qmail system. # # Interesting theory, but hard to believe. All I want is a place to put # a list of addresses that won't be accepted as RCPT TO arguments even # if the domain is otherwise acceptable. Note that there's no new # linkage here to anything other than perhaps a file in which the names # are listed. # # There was two issues above. 1) reject mail being sent to valid usernames # and 2) bounce mail sent to non-valid usernames without accepting the message. # # As you note, 1) Is "easy" to patch in. 2) Is non-trivial. # # If you are in control of the local delivery then you already can control # who sends mail to your database. Why can't you use procmail? # # As has been noted many times, rejecting mail at the SMTP level saves # processing and makes it more likely that the sender will notice that it # was rejected. # # True, but since when has processing be a major issue in a qmail box? # And if the sender is a valid user then qmail will make sure he gets an # error message. # # I'll dig up the patch that does this and try it out. Given that the # badmailfrom code already exists, it shouldn't be very big. # # Yes, but this is only going to resolve "1" above. I noted to the thread poster # that he can use procmail to ensure that only his system can email his # database; and Mark pointed out that he can leave the domain out of # rcpthosts which will prevent qmail-smtpd from accepting it from # remote sites. If the domain is his normal one, then it shouldn't be hard to # use Mark's method and make up a dummy domain for which a .qmail-default # can relay the email through to his database. # # Why does anyone need a control file for "badmailto" ? Think about it. You # don't need one. Why would you want to list valid users email addresses in # a "badmailto" file? (listing non-valid addresses isn't going to do much, # except saving qmail from having to generate a no such user bounce). # and saving on double bounces when you have addresses you generated for posting to newsgroups for certain time periods so that SPAM would be bounced is fine and dandy, until after those addresses are invalid, and the return addresses supplied by spammers are invalid as well. The point here is to eliminate this and to make the spammers/sender notice that the message was undeliverable, BEFORE Qmail accepts it, so it doesnt have to deal with it in the first place. Just as badmailfrom rejects messages before a messages is accepted, badrcptto or something like that should also do the same. -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Simon Schuster AAT | Attention span is quickening.| |Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: qmail II request
On Mon, Jan 04, 1999 at 01:10:01AM +, Paul Gregg wrote: # In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: # On Mon, Jan 04, 1999 at 12:39:33AM +, Paul Gregg wrote: # # If you are in control of the local delivery then you already can control # # who sends mail to your database. Why can't you use procmail? # not every machine has procmail, or wants to run procmail # # Lessee... You willing to hack up badmailfrom to create a badmailto patch # for Qmail 1.0[13], but can't or won't run procmail. Someone please point # out the logic to me, I really can't see it. no, no one wanted to do anything to qmail 1.0[123] it is a feature request for qmail 2 not all machines come with procmail installed, like the later versions of Linux, and not all sites WANT to install procmail, or need to for that matter. -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Simon Schuster AAT | Attention span is quickening.| |Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: qmail II request
On Sat, Jan 02, 1999 at 03:24:45PM -0500, Len Budney wrote: # Hi Vince, # # Vince Vielhaber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # # ...badmailto...I'm getting around 10 or 20 double bounces a day from # these two addresses, and in the past we've had other problems with # nonexistant addresses that double bounce... # # This isn't a detailed criticism--I'm not a mail admin of a large site, # after all! However... # # Can't you already do what you want with existing qmail mechanisms? For # example, suppose these spammers send mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", # which is not a valid address. # # One idea is to create the file ~alias/.qmail-whacko123 with the line: # # # Drop it right now! # # I'm pretty sure that solves your problem right there. If not, replace # the comment with a command like "exit 99" and qmail should discard the # mail and be satisfied. the point I see it as is to not accept the mail in the first place, so the processing power is wasted by the sender, if mail just keeps getting accepted and deleted then it will always keep coming in. If it is not accepted to begin with less resources are wasted by the local machine, and the address(es) may eventually be removed from the spam lists. -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Simon Schuster AAT | Attention span is quickening.| |Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: flushing queue
On Tue, Dec 29, 1998 at 02:17:57PM +0100, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote: # On 28-Dec-98 22:54:49, Samuel Dries-Daffner wrote something about "flushing queue". I just couldn't help replying to it, thus: # I have lots of mail that seems stuck in my queue...how can I flush? # #The first thing to do is, of course, to find out why it is stuck, and fix # that problem. Once you've done that, use # # killall -ALRM qmail-send assuming they are running Linux under solaris this is: killall(1M) Maintenance Commandskillall(1M) NAME killall - kill all active processes SYNOPSIS /usr/sbin/killall [ signal ] -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Simon Schuster AAT | Attention span is quickening.| |Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
Re: Relay to Exchange inside a firewall
On Tue, Dec 22, 1998 at 02:50:02PM -0800, Michael Sage wrote: # Hello, # # As a relative Linux newbie, I need some help setting up qmail to relay ALL # mail for 'domain.com' to an Exchange server inside a firewall. The firewall # access is easy, and I will have my MX record pointing to the qmail box # outside the firewall. What I need help with is: Is there a simple # configuration adjustment that I can make to accomplish this? # in ~alias .qmail-default |forward "$local"@[exchange server ip address -- /- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\ |Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. | |Simon Schuster AAT | Attention span is quickening.| |Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. | \ http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ --/
