Re: pop3 How To
On Fri 1999-11-12 (12:32), john wrote: > >Hi, > >Is there anyone who can clearly specify how to start pop3 and smtp >services ? > >Does anyone have a clear document. I'd suggest taking a look at Dave Sill's "Life With Qmail", specifically sections "2.8. Start qmail" and "5.2. POP and IMAP servers". You can find it at: http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Computer Science) - Rhodes University, South Africa IRC: Panthras JAPHQEFH ---
Re: Maildrop samples
On Thu 1999-11-11 (22:10), Subba Rao wrote: > > I know this question has been asked quite a few > times on this list. Currently, I am using "deliver-maildir" > MDA to get my email. I have installed "Maildrop", since > for "Procmail" there is a lot of work around. I am not > able to find any good sample Maildrop filters, from which > I can learn. There are some examples in the maildropex(5) man page. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Computer Science) - Rhodes University, South Africa IRC: Panthras JAPHQEFH ---
remote routing
Hi there I've just had a user complain that our mail server is not routing mail properly to his machine. He has several virtual domains and mail to these machines is not being routed as he expected. I think that qmail is doing the right thing, and his DNS entries are incorrect, but I'd like more knowledgeable folk to verify this. Mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes directly to centaur.graham.ru.ac.za: pa.ru.ac.za -> centaur.graham.ru.ac.za The user thinks it should go via terrapin.ru.ac.za: pa.ru.ac.za -> terrapin.ru.ac.za -> centaur.graham.ru.ac.za Here's what I think qmail does: 1) Look up the MX record of pa.ru.ac.za: rucus:~$ dnsquery -t MX pa.ru.ac.za [snip] pa.ru.ac.za.3D IN CNAME centaur.graham.ru.ac.za. [snip] 2) Resolve centaur.graham.ru.ac.za 3) Look up the MX record of centaur.graham.ru.ac.za rucus:~$ dnsquery -t MX centaur.graham.ru.ac.za Query failed (h_errno = 4) : No address associated with name rucus:~$ 4) No MX. Let's see if it has an A record: rucus:~$ dnsquery -t MX centaur.graham.ru.ac.za [snip] centaur.graham.ru.ac.za. 3D IN A 146.231.32.200 [snip] 5) It does. Send the mail to centaur.graham.ru.ac.za Of all his virtual hosts, I believe only graham.ru.ac.za is configured correctly. 1) Look up the MX record of graham.ru.ac.za rucus:~$ dnsquery -t mx graham.ru.ac.za [snip] graham.ru.ac.za.3D IN MX10 terrapin.ru.ac.za [snip] 2) Send the mail to terrapin.ru.ac.za Is this correct? Thanks. - Keith (who wishes he had a Qmail book to look this up in ;) -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Computer Science) - Rhodes University, South Africa IRC: Panthras JAPHQEFH ---
new mbox2maildir
Hi there
Guy Halse (of ezmlm-web fame :) has written a new version of mbox2maildir.
This one is very nice because it preserves status flags, instead of just
dumping all messages into new like the existing ones do. So, new messages
go in new, read messages go in cur, and status flags like replied are
preserved.
It has all sorts of sanity checks to make sure you don't lose the mbox.
Even hitting ctrl-c during the conversion leaves you with a copy of the
original mbox, because it only deletes the mbox once it is sure things
completed properly.
It is released under a BSD-style license and you can get it from:
ftp://rucus.ru.ac.za/pub/mail/qmail/guy/mbox2maildir
I've just used it to convert my entire Mail directory to maildirs (so that
I can use IMP) and it works very well. For those who are interested here
are a few on liners that you can use to do this:
Guy says you should use:
% for a in `ls -1`; do echo $a; mbox2maildir $a; done
After which I came up with:
% perl -e 'foreach (`ls -1`) { (print "$_") && chomp && system("mbox2maildir",$_)
}'
After which he came up with a non backticks version:
% perl -e 'for ($moo = opendir MOO, "."; defined($moo) ; $moo = readdir MOO) {
(print "$moo\n") && system("mbox2maildir",$moo) }'
Or you can find a (long and convoluted :) version at:
ftp://rucus.ru.ac.za/pub/mail/qmail/krb/convert2maildir
You choose :-)
- Keith
PS: It is just after 6am here. We've been here for a while ;)
--
Keith Burdis - MSc (Computer Science) - Rhodes University, South Africa
IRC: Panthras JAPHQEFH
---
Qmail book
Hi all A friend pointed this out on www.barnesandnoble.com: Qmail John R. Levine Russell Nelson Tim O'Reilly (Editor) bn.com Price: $29.95 Special Order: Ships 3-5 weeks Format: Paperback, 400pp. ISBN: 1565926285 Publisher: O'Reilly & Associates, Incorporated Pub. Date: September 1999 Please note: This title needs to be ordered directly with the publisher and usually ships within 3-5 weeks. There are occasions where the titles may go out of print or the publishers may no longer carry stock. If we cannot fill your order, we will notify you within 1-2 weeks. No matches on Amazon, Fatbrain or Bookpool. Strangely enough, O'Reilly doesn't appear to have anything about it either. So, John and Russell are you guys to get over to Amazon and start autographying copies for us hungry qmailers next month? ;-) I need a Dolphin to go along with my autographed Camel book. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Computer Science) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: qmail-Linux-distribution
On Fri 1999-08-20 (15:55), Kevin Waterson wrote: > Ira Abramov wrote: > > > > > > > BeroLinux already did that, then Qmail disappeared when it was merged into > > Mandrake Linux. I sugest you switch to Mandrake as a platform (I love it. > > it's also recompiled for Pentium entirely) and ask them to add a legal > > Qmail binary distro into their install process, and make Sendmail an > > option and not a must. I'll join in to that request if you do... > > This is what I am hoping to achieve, A legal qmail binary, not in their > distrobution, > in my own The only qmail binary that I know of that meets Dan's requirements (mostly) is the one done by Mate Wiedl. Take a look at: ftp://moni.msci.memphis.edu/pub/qmail/var-qmail/ > Kevin - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Computer Science) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Personal name & qmail's sendmail replacement
On Sun 1999-07-25 (17:09), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello!
>
> What is the proper environment variable to use for setting
> the personal name in the From: field when sending mail by
> invoking qmail's sendmail replacement?
>
> I'm getting a lite tired of "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" being the only
> thing showing up in the From: field in people's mail clients :)
I use:
export NAME=`perl -e 'print ((split(/,/,(getpwnam($ENV{USER}))[6]))[0]);'`
in my /etc/profile.
It sets the name to the first part of the gecos field.
- Keith
> / Peter Schuller
--
Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa
Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/
IRC : Panthras JAPH
"Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script"
Standard disclaimer.
---
Re: something just ain't right.
On Wed 1999-07-21 (12:09), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I'm still having very poor performance with that mail list. Can someone > please explain to me why qmail doesn't fill the concurrent qmail remote > processes? I'm sitting here with 150,000 mails in the queue and > concurrent remote's are like a 3/75 or 4/75. > > Also, can someone explain the preprocessed stage? This is my qmail-qstat: > > messages in queue: 157489 > messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 121433 > > I need to start pumping this mail out fast. Sounds like you could benefit from using Russ Nelson's big-todo patch. See: http://www.qmail.org/big-todo.103.patch According to Russ: conf-split needs to be bigger if you have more than 23K distinct messages (not addresses) in the queue. big-todo is needed if you're injecting messages faster than qmail-send can process them. Looks like you fall into both categories. As Dave Sill suggested, you'd probably be better off building qmail from source using his instructions at: http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#installation Just before doing "2.5.5. Do the build" apply Russ' patch and edit conf-split changing 23 to 231. I'd suggest only using rpms once you're comfortable with how qmail works, and you understand what the rpm author has done is his (or her I suppose :) SPEC file. > -jeremy - Keith PS: Russ, please add the "According to Russ:..." as a tip :) -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Root exploit in AMaViS
Hi there With the recent thread on using virus scanners I thought some of you should be aware of a root exploit in AMaViS. See: http://linuxtoday.com/stories/7789.html -- Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Trying to achieve maximum speed!
On Tue 1999-07-13 (16:50), Russell Nelson wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > Wow. Looks like I do :-) Can you explain what it does? > > It modifies various programs to use hashed todo and intd directories. > This allows you to inject mail faster than qmail-send can deal with > it. Otherwise, you end up with really big directories with more than > 1,000 files. Once that happens, the kernel spends more and more time > locked reading/writing those directories. Also, if you're injecting > 100,000 messages all at once, make your conf-split bigger -- more like > 231 than the default 23. When does it make sense to apply the big-todo patch and increase the size of conf-split? Is there any ballpark threshhold where these changes become useful? Would it hurt performance in any way if I made these changes on a relatively low volume system? Thanks. > -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Problem running qmail-pop3d under tcpserver
On Tue 1999-07-13 (19:41), Alvaro Escobar wrote: > I changed maildir by Maildir. > > I ran Mark Delany's checkpassword test. I did: > printf "myaccount \0mypassword\0Y123456\0" | /bin/checkpassword id 3<&0 > and the test wass succesfull. > > However when I intent to see my e-mail from any Windows station with > Outlook Express, I get the following message: ´ERR authorization failed´. Okay, so checkpassword works fine. Try telneting to your pop3 port and logging in manually. Your session should go something like this: % telnet localhost pop3 Trying 127.0.0.1... Connected to localhost. Escape character is '^]'. +OK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> USER username +OK PASS yourpassord +OK LIST 1 1268 2 1314 3 1138 4 3399 5 1049 . QUIT +OK Connection closed by foreign host. % If this works, then your problem is most likely with Outlook itself. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Problem running qmail-pop3d under tcpserver
On Mon 1999-07-12 (19:05), Alvaro Escobar wrote: > >I have Linux 2.0.36. I installed qmail. It is working fine. > >I am running qmail-smtpd under tcpserver and qmail-pop3d under inetd. >I can see my e-mails from any Windows station with Outlook Express. > >I would like to have qmail-pop3d running under tcpserver too. > >I put the following line in my rc.local: > > > >tcpserver -v -R 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup ns1.integral.com.co >\ > >/bin/checkpasswd /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d maildir 2>&1 | \ > >/var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d & Your tcpserver line appears to be fine. Perhaps maildir should be Maildir though. >However when I intent to see my e-mail from any Windows station with >Outlook Express, I get the following message: ´ERR authorization >failed´. I suspect checkpassword is your problem. Mark Delany's checkpassword test at the top of the "Alternative Checkpassword Implementations" on www.qmail.org should help. (Just a note though that on my system id is in /usr/bin). - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Serialmail
On Mon 1999-06-21 (14:32), Stewart Jeacocke wrote: > I have been trying to automate the uploading of messages from a Maildir > to a remote SMTP server (my isp's). Using serialmail on RedHat 6 > > If I execute > /usr/local/bin/maildirsmtp ~alias/pppqueue alias-ppp- > smtpmail.globalnet.co.uk jeacocke > at the command prompt all works fine > > However when I put it in a /etc/ppp/ip-up.local script it doesn't work > > Any Ideas >From the maildirsmtp man page: maildirsmtp needs tcpclient in $PATH Perhaps when /etc/ppp/ip-up.local executes /usr/local/bin or wherever tcpclient is, is not in the PATH. Try something like: PATH=$PATH:/usr/local/bin maildirsmtp ~alias/pppqueue ... HTH > Stewart - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: checkpassword from the command line
On Fri 1999-06-04 (10:54), Don Rose wrote: > I know this has been posted in the past, but I can't figure it out for the > life of me. Here's what I'm trying to do: > > Take a username and password from user entry (CGI script). > Check it against the master password database. > > I have tried the command-line solution given on the qmail.org homepage, > but I can't make it work. Here's been my try so far : > > I have printed the string "user\000password\000Y123456\000" into a file > using a perl script, so it turns the \000 into the null character > checkpassword is looking for (I believe. I then pass the file to > checkpassword like so : > > /bin/checkpassword /bin/id 3 Just like it says on the page. This results in nothing happening, hence I > take it the password is not being accepted even though it is correct. I > am running on FreeBSD 3.1, and checkpassword works with the qmail install > I have, so I know my version works. But I need to be able to use it from > the command line, or at least something other than qmail-popup. It is the > most secure way of checking a password by a non-root application I can > think of, and that is allowed by my boss. can someone help me out please? > Thanks. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: mail relay for any IP,but only for valid logins - how??
On Wed 1999-05-26 (17:16), olli wrote: > On Sun, 23 May 1999, Per Birkeby wrote: > > I'm sorry for noise, but I didn't find that in FAQ.. Well , I need to > allow mail relaying for anyone ( if it is easy to do this on a per user > basis - very fine ) who have valid pop3/smtp account on my server. In > /etc/tcp.smtp I can allow IPs.. Is it possible to allow/deny users with > tcpserver? I'll be glad to see a name of the manual or url where I can > find detailed explanation of tcp.cmtp used with tcpserver. Sorry - > unfortunately I've got a lot of other work , so it's almost impossible > for me (at least in 2 nearest weeks) to search the web w/ this > question... Could anyone help,please? :)~ Perhaps you need this: Russell Nelson has a system to allow relaying to any host which authenticates itself through a POP3 connection. Only thing is, it's dependent upon the user to do the right thing, because at least Eudora and Netscape send mail before checking for new mail. You can turn that feature off, but still the user needs to get into the habit of checking for mail before sending mail. See www.qmail.org under the User-Contributed Software for Qmail section. > Bye.Olli. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: qmail-analog with cyclog
On Thu 1999-04-29 (15:36), Chris Garrigues wrote: > In recent times, I've been installing qmail off of the SRPM from > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Previously, I built it myself. This SRPM uses a > variety of packages that I haven't fully mastered yet (such as daemontools, > etc). > > One of the changes is that I was using syslog and it uses cyclog. > > Every night at midnight, I have a cronjob that rotates the syslog and sends > email with a qmail-analog report in it. Since cyclog may cycle it's logs at > any time, it isn't clear to me how to integrate qmail-analog with cyclog. > > How are other people getting daily reports of qmail usage when they use cyclog? I'm doing that. When I first started using the Memphis rpm I just changed the init script to use splogger, but after asking questions on this and the cyclog list I came up with something that gives me stats every day using cyclog and qmailanalog. It's a bit of a hack and needs cleaning up, but you can find it at: ftp://yoda.cs.ru.ac.za/pub/qmail/krb HTH - Keith > Chris -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: qmail not fsstnd (Was: old popdeamons ...)
On Wed 1999-04-28 (20:31), Pike wrote: > Hi > > >> That was my original complaint ... the qmail rpm swoops itself all over > >> your fs symlinking every possible place where someone would possibly look > >> for it. > > > >I haven't installed from RPM so I may be wrong, but surely there are only two > >locations for each file, one in the FSSTND location and one in /var/qmail? > > Yes, you're right ... I charged that :-) > except for the docs ( they're _only_ in /usr/doc) > and for the mqueue (it's _only_ in /var/qmail) > > So there are max 2 locations for each file somewhere on your fs, > either the fsstnd place or in /var/qmail, or both. Still with me ? Well that's easy enough to fix. Just hack the spec file to put the files elsewhere. Perhaps change the spec file to move directories instead of symlinking. > The docs and the man-pages don't refer to these fsstnd locations at all, > so it's all just very confusing. If it's not fsstnd, don't fake it, and if you > do fake it, do it right. You could use Perl to to in place editing of the man pages. > Overall conclusion: _don't_use_the_rpm_to_install_qmail_ > At least, not my build, which was done by [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sorry david. Well, David just created an rpm that worked for him and was kind enough to share it with the rest of us. He and the other rpm maintainers have been very open to suggestions for improvements and changes. There are other rpms by Mate Wierdl, Bruce Guenter and Mr Sam that I know about. I've used both David's and Mate's rpms and they've worked well for me. RPMS usually provide extra features like init scripts that I find useful, and if you want to understand how the package was installed you can always take a look at the spec file. It lists what patches where applied and the process used to take the source and install it. You can change it as necessary and make a new rpm if you need to. > *PIKE* - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Qmail performance statistics
On Wed 1999-04-28 (14:20), Fred Lindberg wrote: > Hi, > > Has anyone for fun taken a high-end machine and produced the type of > statistics that www.lsoft.com is presenting for lsmtp > (http://www.lsoft.com/lsmtp.html)? They are obviously geared towards > overestimation, but it would be useful for comparison. I realize that > qmail is currently limited to a 255 concurrency (without parallel > installations) and that the lsmtp stats deal with outgoing traffic > only. > > Has anyone done a direct comparison between lsmtp and qmail for mailing > lists? lserv and ezmlm? This would be useful. Are there any standard (or commonly used) benchmarks used to measure MTA and mailing list performance? Dan: you quoted stats on your web page about qmail's performance. Are the benchmarks you used available anywhere, so that they can be used to apply similar tests to other MTAs? - Keith > -Sincerely, Fred -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: qmail-pop3d
On Tue 1999-04-27 (12:30), Russell Nelson wrote: > Keith Burdis writes: > > I'm wanting to move a system over to maildirs and just got asked this > > question about qmail-pop3d: > > > > does it handle large mailboxes in qpopper style (ie stream off disk > > rather than the traditional method of slurp the whole lot into ram then > > stream out from there) > > It reads the whole directory into memory; not the file contents. The > POP3 protocol *requires* that you not add new messages as they appear, > so checkpointing the state of the mailbox is absolutely necessary. > But to answer your question more directly, it streams off disk. > > -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson Thanks Russel and Peter. That should settle it. I'm slowly moving the system over to maildirs. I'm facing the usual resistence, but I've managed to convince the other admins that mutt should be the default mailer. Now with qmail-pop3d, only the die-hard elm users will still use mailbox. yay! :-) - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
qmail-pop3d
I'm wanting to move a system over to maildirs and just got asked this question about qmail-pop3d: does it handle large mailboxes in qpopper style (ie stream off disk rather than the traditional method of slurp the whole lot into ram then stream out from there) I don't know C well enough to figure it out. Can anyone give me an answer? Thanks. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: QMail Book
On Wed 1999-04-21 (10:02), Jim Beam wrote: > Does anyone know the expected release date of the QMail book? I want to > add it to my collection :-) Joe Garcia writes: > What is the ETA of the book nowadays Russell?? Russell Nelson writes: > Depends on the production schedule and all, so I have no authoritative > information. I'd guess some time in August, assuming that johnl and I > stick to our part of the schedule. It still hasn't appeared on O'Reilly's "New & Upcoming Titles" list: http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/new.html but that only lists stuff coming out in May or June at the moment. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: qmail anti-SPAM relaying support ???
On Mon 1999-04-19 (15:00), Erwann CORVELLEC wrote: > I have a local network (PC Win9x) and a qmail server (Linux) both connected to the >Net. > I want to allow only the local network to use the qmail SMTP server to relay mail. >This to avoid spam relaying... > So I read the "Selective relaying with tcpserver and qmail-smtpd" documentation but >I don't want to use the ucspi-tcp solution for two reasons: > - I run qmail as a standalone daemon > - The system is a Linux Debian one so it is using inetd, and to avoid >incompatibilities with this distribution I don't want to use solutions that are not >officialy supported... > > Is there another solution ??? > > I seriously consider to stop using qmail. As there are too many add-ons I find qmail >has limited functionalities by its own: It is the second time I have a problem and I >am getting disappointed... :( > Here was my first problem: I have a callback connection to the Net so I wanted qmail >to send mails (ie to empty its queue) only every half hour to limit the costs. But >that is not possible except via a add-on/patch once again... :( > It's a shame because qmail is nice on other points like security, control files or >aliases. > What about qmail 2.0 with more built-in functionnalities ??? ;) The qmail system is built using the philosphy of having many small utilities that do one thing really well, and then combining these utilities to make something useful happen. (A process that has been referred to as Bernstein chaining, coined by Russ Nelson I think). I'm sure you must have noticed that qmail delivery takes place using a number of seperate programs that communicate will each other in well defined ways. It just so happens that the programs that you need for basic mail delivery are packaged all together in the qmail-1.03 tarball. In order to do other useful stuff you need the utilities supplied in the daemontools, ucspi-tcp and perhaps other packages. If you wish to use qmail sucessfully you have to buy into the philosopy of how it works. It is completely different to sendmail that has pretty much everything built into a single binary. However, unlike sendmail it is small, fast and secure. - Keith > ECO. -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: ERR User has no $HOME/maildir (STILL GETTING ERROR)
On Mon 1999-04-19 (14:01), Jay wrote: > >OK, thanks for your help so far, but I am still getting the error > > > >/home/whoever/Maildir > >exists now, and it has mail in it but outlook express responds first >with rejecting the password, but gives me that same error again. > >ERR User has no $HOME/maildir > >any other ideas? Perhaps your checkpassword is not working properly. Have a look on www.qmail.org under the "Alternative Checkpassword Implementations" section for Mark Delany's tip on how to check if your checkpassword is working correctly. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
qmail on FreeBSD
Hi there I just noticed that Nathan Underwood [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] is running a series of articles on qmail for The FreeBSD 'zine (www.freebsdzine.org). Might be useful to people running qmail under FreeBSD. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: [Q] qmail speed "again"
On Wed 1999-04-14 (12:18), Silver CHEN wrote: > Dear Keith: > > I think you got my point, thanks. > > My experience on sendmail at this tpoic *is* quite good - sorry, I don't > have such experience on qmail yet. > > My intuition tells me that the first way will be better, since it will send > only one copy of messages on network. If I have a 30KB+ message size, and > 400K subscribers, the first method 'seems' to be much more efficient than > the second one. > > However, this is what I 'think' - no real world experience on qmail yet. > > I'll examine this behavior on qmail soon, the machine is still in the box, > I don't have time to open/assamble/install it these days. > > Our newsletters have 'sponsors', and some information is time-intensive, > so my life is harder and harder :( > > Anyway, thanks for any comment on this tpoic. Please note that I only speculated that sendmail would be faster in this one particular case. For pretty much any other scenario qmail is significantly faster. I have noticed that using multiple-rcpt messages to one particular host appeared to be faster than many single message individual smtp sessions, but as my fellow list members have pointed out this does not necessarily mean that this would always be the case. If you're looking for speed, qmail is definitely the way to go. If all of your 400K subscribers are on the same remote host then perhaps do some profiling to see whether or not you'd gain by using multiple rcpt to's. Otherwise IMHO don't bother. Just use qmail :-) - Keith > Silver CHEN -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: [Q] qmail speed "again"
On Tue 1999-04-13 (09:56), Dave Sill wrote: > I'm replying to several messages here (see References), but I'm not > going to bother attributing each quote. > > >> >qmail will always be faster than sendmail [unless you send one message > >> >to a large number of addresses on the same remote host]. > >> > >> No, qmail will usually win here, too, because sendmail serializes. > >> Sendmail only wins when the message is huge. > > > >Sendmail will win if you use multiple rcpt-to's. > > No, SMTP requires too many round trips per recipient. What I had in mind was that with sendmail you can do: HELO MAIL FROM RCPT TO: RCPT TO: RCPT TO: DATA ... whereas with qmail, since it doesn't do multiple rcpts, you'd have to do: for i = 1 to n HELO MAIL FROM RCPT TO: DATA ... QUIT Remember that we're talking about sending one message to a large number of addresses on the same remote host. In general qmail is faster, but I think in this case any MTA that does multiple rcpt to's will be quicker. > -Dave - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: cyclog vs. syslog (was: Queue limit question)
On Mon 1999-04-12 (15:34), Stefan Paletta wrote: > Dave Sill wrote/schrieb/scribsit: > > Disadvantages: only logs messages sent to stdout, only logs messages > > from local system > > You can use ucspi-tcp to reliably send log messages from one program's > stdout to a cyclog on another host. Please could you show an example of how you'd do this. - Keith > Stefan -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: [Q] qmail speed "again"
On Mon 1999-04-12 (13:13), Marc Slemko wrote: > On Mon, 12 Apr 1999, Dave Sill wrote: > > > "Fred Lindberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >qmail will always be faster than sendmail [unless you send one message > > >to a large number of addresses on the same remote host]. > > > > No, qmail will usually win here, too, because sendmail serializes. > > Sendmail only wins when the message is huge. > > Actually, if you are unfortunate enough to have a list of addresses sorted > by the right side of the @, qmail can be a big loser here. This is > because it will completely overload many remote hosts if there are a bunch > of recipients. eg. concurrencyremote = 120, you have 200 users > @somedomain, qmail will sit there with 120 connections to somedomain's > mailserver open while they all crawl along because somedomain can't handle > 120 connections at once. > > qmail is great that way at inflicting remote DoS attacks against other > mailers. Well, the obvious question is why do mailers accept connections that they cannot handle? If the remote host accepts the mail it should be prepared to deal with it. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: [Q] qmail speed "again"
On Mon 1999-04-12 (11:41), Dave Sill wrote: > "Fred Lindberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >qmail will always be faster than sendmail [unless you send one message > >to a large number of addresses on the same remote host]. > > No, qmail will usually win here, too, because sendmail serializes. > Sendmail only wins when the message is huge. Sendmail will win if you use multiple rcpt-to's. - Keith > -Dave -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Is *anybody* using XTND XMIT in qmail-pop3d ?
On Thu 1999-04-08 (11:56), John Grant wrote: > >On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, John Grant wrote: > > > >> So, is anybody using XMIT ? Since it's a standard feature in qpopper I > would > >> hope that someone is doing this... > > > >it may be a standard feature in qpopper, the issue here is that it's not > >part of the POP standard, and so most mail clients don't seem to support > >it. Hence, since none of my users is clamouring for it there's no point in > >me spending time on it. > > > This to support our remote users who often end up on other companies' > networks. Many companies now use firewalls to redirect outgoing port 25 > traffic that is not from a 'known' mailhost to the internal mail host for > processing. > > We want our remote users to be able to send email with our company domain > name on it, without a) having to have customer firewalls reconfigured, or > b)leaving our mail server open as a spam relay. > > So it looks like I'll be redoing the patches (and of course posting the > results). >From www.qmail.org: DJB has three suggestions for allowing your users to relay when they're not at a known IP address (which is the FAQ 5.4 solution): Use a secret IP address and port number, and you'll have much better security than user-chosen passwords. Put a secret string into the HELO string sent by the client. This will be visible to the fixup script, so you can reject messages with bad passwords without changing qmail-smtpd---and it's still more widely supported than XTND XMIT. Oh, you want real security? Check that all messages are PGP-signed by local users. I wouldn't be surprised if PGP plugins are available for more clients than XTND XMIT patches are. I'm sure you can see how Dan feels about it :-) - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: AOL Cname lookup failure???
On Sun 1999-04-04 (08:55), Bill Parker wrote: > > Non-authoritative answer: > aol.com preference = 15, mail exchanger = ya.mx.aol.com > aol.com preference = 15, mail exchanger = yb.mx.aol.com > aol.com preference = 15, mail exchanger = yc.mx.aol.com > aol.com preference = 15, mail exchanger = yd.mx.aol.com > aol.com preference = 15, mail exchanger = za.mx.aol.com > aol.com preference = 15, mail exchanger = zb.mx.aol.com > aol.com preference = 15, mail exchanger = zc.mx.aol.com > aol.com preference = 15, mail exchanger = zd.mx.aol.com > > Authoritative answers can be found from: > aol.com nameserver = DNS-01.NS.aol.com > aol.com nameserver = DNS-02.NS.aol.com > ya.mx.aol.com internet address = 205.188.156.4 > ya.mx.aol.com internet address = 205.188.156.5 > ya.mx.aol.com internet address = 205.188.156.1 > ya.mx.aol.com internet address = 205.188.156.2 > ya.mx.aol.com internet address = 205.188.156.3 > yb.mx.aol.com internet address = 205.188.156.100 > > Now, which entry is preferred for the smtproutes file here (or can I just > pick one I like)? They all have the same preference so you can just pick one. - Keith > -Bill -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: AOL Cname lookup failure???
On Sun 1999-04-04 (11:13), xs wrote: > > one question tho, is it possible to have more than one route for something > in smtproutes, ie: > > aol.com:la-me.mx.aol.com > aol.com:du-mb.mx.aol.com > ... > ? I don't think so. From looking at qmail-remote.c, it appears to stop once it finds a matching entry. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: AOL Cname lookup failure???
On Sat 1999-04-03 (14:41), Bill Parker wrote: > > > >There are a couple of things you can do. One is to patch qmail with one of > the > >large DNS packet patches, which you'll find on the qmail web site. The other, > >easier thing to do is to look up the mail exchangers for aol.com and stick > one > >of them in your smtproutes file, like so: > > > >aol.com:yc.mx.aol.com > > > > U, i looked in controls (and I don't have a smtproutes file), is this > where it goes (we need O'Reilly to publish a qmail book which covers all > this neat stuff in simple plain english)... Well you're in luck. Russell Nelson is busy with one at the moment. Should be out in a few months. > -Bill > > p.s. - will smtproutes cause any problems with std mail delivery? Yes, smtproutes goes in the control directory (man qmail-control). Basically, as I understand it, if you list a host or domain in smtproutes qmail will not do a DNS lookup to find out where to deliver the mail, it will use the host that you specify instead. So, to get around the fact that AOL returns large DNS packets when qmail does an MX lookup, the suggestion was to hardcode one of AOL's mail servers as the destination for all aol mail and thereby avoid doing the DNS lookups. > >Chris - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: sending email for local root to local user - I must be doing something wrong?
On Wed 1999-03-31 (20:04), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > If I send an email to local [EMAIL PROTECTED], I get the following > error: > > delivery xxx: Deferral: > Unable_to_open_/var/spool/mail/jurriaan./_(#4.2.1)/ > > in /root/.qmail: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > in /home/jurriaan/.qmail: > > /var/spool/mail/jurriaan > > All other mail send from outside to jurriaan, sent from jurriaan to > jurriaan goes well. Other local users can send to jurriaan as well. > I've read and re-read man dot-qmail, and I don't see what's going wrong > here. Permissions on both /root/.qmail and /home/jurriaan/.qmail are > -rw---, owned by root resp. jurriaan. > > middle.of.nowhere is listed in /var/qmail/control/locals, so no > virtualdomain should interfere. I've even added a > /home/jurriaan/.qmail-default and /home/jurriaan/.qmail-root, same > permissions, same content as /home/jurriaan/.qmail. No luck. > > I'm not sure how the dot after /var/spool/mail/jurriaan comes into > existence, I'm not sure if some qmail-subprogram (qmail-queue, right) is > run as user root and cannot send email to jurriaan? > > Please give some hint as to what is going wrong here! Qmail never delivers mail as root, so it won't look up a .qmail file in root's home directory (since the usual process is to change to the uid of the user before doing this). So, you have to create ~alias/.qmail-root containing: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you should get what you want. - Keith > Jurriaan -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Melissa Virus
On Tue 1999-03-30 (06:34), Russ Allbery wrote: > Furthermore, remember that this particular virus only has to send mail. > It doesn't have to modify system files. It only has to modify your > personal document files. It would therefore work just fine on a Unix > system given a suitable Unix application. It is *not* Microsoft-specific > in concept; it is only Microsoft-specific in implementation. Were some > other operating system run by 90% of the computer users in the world, > you'd see these sorts of things written for that operating system. > > Don't fool yourself that it can't happen to you simply by virtue of > running a different operating system. The only way it can't happen to you > is if you always *think* before running random programs on stuff you get > via untrusted channels. I agree with Russ. I'm no Microsoft fan, but such problems are not Windoze-specific. They just have the potential to cause more damage on Windoze. Here's an example of a "similar" incident that affected some unix mail clients (mutt in particular) as well as Windoze ones. http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-98.10.mime_buffer_overflows.html CERT Advisory CA-98.10 Buffer Overflow in MIME-aware Mail and News Clients Description A vulnerability in some MIME-aware mail and news clients could allow an intruder to execute arbitrary code, crash the system, or gain administrative rights on vulnerable systems. The vulnerability has been discovered by Marko Laakso and Ari Takanen of the Secure Programming Group of the University of Oulu. It has received considerable public attention in the media and through reports published by Microsoft, Netscape, AUSCERT, CIAC, NTBugTraq, and others. The vulnerability affects a number of mail and news clients in addition to the ones which have been the subjects of those reports. II. Impact An intruder who sends a carefully crafted mail message to a vulnerable system can, under some circumstances, cause code of the intruder's choosing to be executed on the vulnerable system. Additionally, an intruder can cause a vulnerable mail program to crash unexpectedly. Depending on the operating system on which the mail client is running and the privileges of the user running the vulnerable mail client, the intruder may be able to crash the entire system. If a privileged user reads mail with a vulnerable mail user agent, an intruder can gain administrative access to the system. As Russ said it is a mindset problem. I doubt many people here would have been hurt by this bug if they used mutt as a MUA, because they probably don't read mail as root (since they're running qmail :) and they are careful about what they execute. Sure Microsoft is part of the problem, but they are by no means alone. As long as the people who write software don't take security seriously enough such things will continue to happen. And, with more Windoze and Mac software being ported to Unix-like systems like Linux and FreeBSD, I reckon we're going to being seeing more incidents on these systems. The impact probably won't be as great as on Windoze 95/98/2000, but then it's not as great on Windoze NT either. > -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: daemontools and sshd
On Thu 1999-03-25 (14:45), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi there,
> I know it's a little bit off the topic of this list. Please accept my
> apology here. I just try to find out anybody out there has ever tried this
> combination before.
>
> Here is the script to start the daemon:
> #! /bin/sh
> ROG=sshd
> LKDIR=/var/lock/sshd
>
> mkdirs() {
> [ -d $LKDIR ] || ( mkdir -p $LKDIR );
> }
>
> start () {
> mkdirs
> echo -n "Starting $PROG..."
> supervise $LKDIR /usr/local/sbin/$PROG &
> echo "done"
> }
>
> But the supervise somehow thinks the sshd is dead and keeps starting
> it, giving out the following messages continuously:
>
> Starting sshd...FATAL: Creating listener failed: port 22 probably
> already in use!
>
>
> The sshd program is downloaded and compiled from
> http://www.ssh.fi/sshprotocols2/index.html
I remember hacking at Mate Wierdl's tcpserver-initscripts package to make it
use ssh instead of rsh, and IIRC I had to use sshd -i rather than just sshd.
This prevents it from forking and putting itself in the background.
- Keith
> Thanks a lot in advanced.
> --George Hong
--
Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa
Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/
IRC : Panthras JAPH
"Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script"
Standard disclaimer.
---
Re: FW: GET ME OFF THIS DAMN LIST
On Wed 1999-03-24 (10:33), Adam D. McKenna wrote: > From: Julian L.C. Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > : > : >Noo!!! People who are ignorant enough to send mail to the > : >whole list are usually too ignorant to actually *read* the messages to > : >find out how to get off the list. It's just a waste of bandwidth and > : >screen space. > : > : I don't mean to sound like a prick but what a silly argument. 1) A waste > : of bandwidth? 2 additional lines is really not a waste of bandwidth. 2) > : Screen space? 2 Lines (unless in 320x200) is not a lot of screen space - > : either. > > it's not just 2 lines. It's 2 lines x # of subscribers x messages per day. > Assuming a "line" is 40 characters, there are 1000 subscribers, and 50 > messages per day, that's 4 megabytes per day extra. Dan has an interesting sarcastic doc about saving bandwidth :-) See: ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/sarcasm/modest-proposal.txt -- Keith > --Adam -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: .qmail files - shell syntax?
On Fri 1999-03-19 (17:04), Scott Schwartz wrote:
> Joel Eriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | > You need a ";" before the "}".
> |
> | Huh?
>
> Yes. That's how the Bourne shell works.
>
> | [root@hades ~]# /bin/sh -c '{ echo foo; echo bar }'
> | foo
> | bar
> |
> | No trailing ; needed..?
>
> That's a nonstandard feature of whatever shell you've got installed as
> /bin/sh.
Most likely a Linux system where sh is really bash.
[keith@dagobah gaa]$ which sh
/bin/sh
[keith@dagobah gaa]$ ls -al /bin/sh
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root4 Nov 27 20:35 /bin/sh -> bash
[keith@dagobah gaa]$
But even the bash appears to be non-standard though since bash on FreeBSD
doesn't like the syntax either.
Oh well. Better to stick to the standard.
-- Keith
--
Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa
Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/
IRC : Panthras JAPH
"Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script"
Standard disclaimer.
---
Re: Summers rpm failure
On Fri 1999-02-19 (22:56), Keith Burdis wrote: > You have sendmail installed. It gets installed by default on Red Hat systems. > You need to remove sendmail before you can install qmail. > > # rpm --nodeps sendmail As Mate pointed out to me privately (thanks), this should have been: # rpm --nodeps -e sendmail -- Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Summers rpm failure
On Fri 1999-02-19 (15:41), Martin wrote: > Hello. > > At this point :- > > This creates three Qmail RPMs in /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386. The only one you > are interested in is qmail-1.03-6.i386.rpm, you don't need the other two. Now > let's install it: > > $ rpm -U /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/qmail-1.03-6.i386.rpm > > it fails with 'failed dependencies: sendmail conflicts with qmail-1.03-6' > > Why is this ?? You have sendmail installed. It gets installed by default on Red Hat systems. You need to remove sendmail before you can install qmail. # rpm --nodeps sendmail You need the --nodeps because there are some programs that require an smtp daemon to be installed. But, since you're about to install qmail this shouldn't be a problem. You might find: http://rucus.ru.ac.za/qmail/summersoft.html useful. - Keith > Regards...Martin -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Qmail mailing list and ReplyTo:
On Fri 1999-02-19 (15:22), Rok Papez wrote: > On Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:05:31 -0500, Mark Bainter wrote: > > >Just use mutt. ( http://www.mutt.org ) > > > >(And yes, I'm not using it now. Qmail comes to my work account because > >I'm too lazy to move it. I use mutt for all my other lists and it works > >great. It is able to recognize lists and when you want to reply to a > >list address it can handle it w/no need to munge reply-to's. Check it > >out.) > > I tried it... It wasn't pleasent for use. I'm used to PINE, joe, > PMMail. > Mutt is a step in a totaly new direction, I know it is more powerful; > but I PINE is a lot more intuitive for use (for me that is ) :). I hear this sort of thing a lot. I wish that someone would take the innards of mutt and package them up nicely so that people can write nice interfaces to sit on top of it. That way we'd have all the cool features of mutt (and hopefully some from other MUAs that mutt doesn't have) with an interface to suit everyones taste. Anyone keen? :-) maybe one day when I have time... - Keith > Rok Papez, -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Qmail Documentation (was addresses containing . )
On Thu 1999-02-18 (08:10), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, Peter van Dijk wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 17, 1999 at 12:33:04PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > On Wed, 17 Feb 1999, Chris Naden wrote: > > > > > > for qmail-send: for its description of locals to explicitly say that > > > virtual domains should *not* be placed in locals? > > > > > > for qmail-smtpd: for its description of rcpthosts to say that it > > > should contain all the hosts in locals and virtualdomains plus > > > those hosts you act as MX for. > > > > > > Actually, in stead of the latter suggestion, I'd prefer that there be > > > another control file: mxhosts, and drop rcpthosts, which is just > > > confusing everyone. Then we have simple explanations for what goes where. > > > You're not saying that qmail-smtpd should just read in locals and > > virtualdomains and accept mail for all domains in there, right? > > No. I was suggesting replacing rcpthosts with mxhosts and having > smail-smtpd read virtualdomains, locals and mxhosts. Having looked at > "man qmail-control" I've decided that the reason Dan did things this way > is that qmail-smtpd only has to read/check one file (rcpthosts), rather > than three (virtualdomains, locals and mxhosts). It's a typical tradeoff: > simpler program vs requiring people to read the documentation and put the > right things in rcpthosts. I quite like the way Dan has made rcpthosts work. It allows you to easily specify who you'll receive mail for in one place. The only thing that I'd like is for the behaviour when rcpthosts doesn't exist to change. Since the "normal" thing is for rcpthosts to be locals + virtualdomains I think that this should be the default if rcpthosts doesn't exist. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: 100,000 mailing lists
On Sat 1999-02-13 (15:34), Tim Pierce wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 1999 at 11:43:39PM +1100, Mark Delany wrote: > > At 11:45 PM 2/10/99 -0800, Dongping Deng wrote: > > >Let's consider a hypothetical situation: a machine needs to host 100,000 > > >mailing lists, each list has subscribers, say, less than 15; and the > > >traffic for each list is less than 3 a day. > > > > Lemme see. 100,000 * 15 * 3 = 4.5million deliveries a day. > > ... > > > > It's probably more appropriate to ask whether your underlying qmail system > > can deliver 4.5M messages a day. It's within the realms of possibility, but > > a standard single spindle system probably wont hack it. > > Is there a FAQ on configuring qmail to use multiple delivery queues? > I can't see offhand how to do this from a stock qmail, and couldn't > find any relevant info on www.qmail.org. If you'd like to see how I went about it, take a look at: http://rucus.ru.ac.za/qmail/multiplicity.html HTH - Keith > Tim Pierce -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Qmail RPM available?
On Sat 1999-02-06 (10:42), Bill Parker wrote: > Hello, > > I was wondering if a QMAIL RPM is available for Linux (RH or Caldera, etc)? Yup, there are several (4 if I remember correctly). My two favourite are: the Memphis RPM: ftp://moni.msci.memphis.edu/pub/qmail and the Summersoft RPM: ftp://ftp.engr.uark.edu/pub/qmail/qmail-1.03 You might also like to look at: http://rucus.ru.ac.za/qmail/memphis.html and http://rucus.ru.ac.za/qmail/summersoft.html for help on installing these. (Note the these docs are out of date. I did update them but I can't find the new versions :). For example, David Summers' rpm now includes dot-forward and fastforward, so you don't need to install those). I'd recommend the Summersoft RPM is you want a basic sendmail-compatible setup that uses inetd. The Memphis RPM is more fully featured, since it uses the daemontools and ucspi-tcp packages. It has nice initscripts too. This is what I use. The other two that I know of are by Mr Sam and Bruce Guenter. You should be able to find links to them on http://www.qmail.org/. - Keith > -Bill -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: qmail-spawn_unable_to_create_pipe
On Fri 1999-02-05 (12:24), Franky Van Liedekerke wrote: > Hi, > > for some addresses to a remote server, I always get this error. What > does this mean? You've probably hit some OS resource limit. Usually it's the maximum number of file descriptors and maximum number of processes that need to be upped. On my system I have: ulimit -n 1024 ulimit -u 1024 before the qmail-start line in my qmail startup script. There is a formula for working out how many of each you need depending on what your concurrencyremote is. I'm sure someone here will enlighten us. :-) - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: trouble opening local
On Mon 1999-02-01 (22:44), Jake Jellinek wrote: > Hi, > > I get loads of messages in my qmail log like this: > > 917908634.888123 warning: trouble opening local/0/361859; will try again later > 917908638.898115 warning: trouble opening local/22/361858; will try again later > > Can anyone shed any light or point me in the right direction as to > what this means? (other than I haven't set something up properly!). I > haven't noticed any outgoing or incoming mail failures, but I presume > something isn't working as it should! > > Thanks in advance for any help on this one. > > (oh and apologies in advance if this is an obvious problem that I > should have read about somewhere already! I did try a web search > honest.) Try typing: make setup check from your qmail source directory. I've found that this sorts out a lot of these problems. - Keith > Best regards, > Jake -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Mangling From: headers by recipient domain
On Sun 1999-01-31 (20:11), Mate Wierdl wrote: > >| newinject > >in ~alias/.qmail-company-domain, putting the rewriting rules in >control/rewrite. > > Typo: it is `|new-inject'. In any case, I think the problem somehow > is that if he just does what you suggest, the message would again be > sent to companydomain, that is back to the local machine (since the > companydomain virtualdomain points there). Indeed. You are quite correct. As I said I've never used it before ;-) > The message the qmail server gets is just simply relayed to > relay.ourdomain and now he wants to rewrite the From: header. The main problem with his original proposal is that the relay host may be down, so the mail needs to be queued somehow before being sent. Perhaps it would be best to store it in a maildir one the rewriting has been done, and then try the delivery from there. Something like: virtualdomains: companydomain:alias-companydomain ~alias/.outgoing-filter: DEFAULT="./outgoing/" ~alias/.qmail-companydomain-default: | preline -d -f swap_from | maildrop .outgoing-filter # maildirmake ~alias/outgoing And then run something like sdeliver (http://rucus.ru.ac.za/keith/qmail/) to deliver the mail from the maildir. Hopefully this suggestion works :) - Keith > Mate -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Mangling From: headers by recipient domain
On Fri 1999-01-29 (22:33), Paul Halliday wrote: > Hi folks, [snip] > What's the best strategy to approach this with qmail? > > Thus far I'd decided on a virtualdomain as follows: > > companydomain:alias-companydomain > > and in ~alias/.qmail-company-domain: > > | preline -d -f swap_from | qmail-remote relay.ourdomain $SENDER > $RECIPIENT > > 'swap_from' is obviously a program to explicitely change the From: field > to the company required one one. I think what you need is new-inject from Dan's mess822 package. It rewrites mail addreses according to rules that you specify and then reinserts the message into the queue. You can get the package from: http://pobox.com/~djb/software.html Take a look at the new-inject(1) and rewriting(5) man pages. I've not used it before but as I understand it you'd put: | newinject in ~alias/.qmail-company-domain, putting the rewriting rules in control/rewrite. > This solution works OK in normal circumstances but is not at all robust > because if the relay is down then the mail gets lost. It seems as though > qmail-send isn't designed to listen to what a virtualdomain returns - it > just deletes it from the queue and assumes the piped programs will know > what to do with it(?) I think reinserting the rewritten message into the queue will solve the problem of the remote relay not being available. > I hope someone can tell me that I'm doing it all wrong and that there's a > simpler and more robust way of solving this header re-writing problem > efficiently! The mess822 package is even cooler than I though it was :-) > Many thanks in advance, > Paul - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: qmail eats up my memory
On Fri 1999-01-29 (15:04), Van Liedekerke Franky wrote: > qmail version: 1.03 > > after a couple of hours, the qmail-lspawn process became huge (813M), eating > up all my memory and of course blocking everything. > Anybody seen this before? I had a similar problem a while back, but it turned out not to be a qmail problem at all. One of the other sysadmins had upgraded some libraries used by qmail. After recompiling and reinstalling everything worked perfectly. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: VERH [was VERB]
On Thu 1999-01-21 (04:40), Russell Nelson wrote: > Fred Lindberg writes: > > On 19 Jan 1999 20:11:56 -, Russell Nelson wrote: > > > > >Okay, VERP has solved the bounce problem. Now we need VERB (Variable > > >Envelope Recipient in Body) to solve the unsubscribe problem. > > >Basically, we need qmail-remote to merge the envelope recipient into > > >the message somewhere. The problem, of course, is *where* to insert > > > > I think the substitution idea is good, but putting it into the message > > is Not Good (TM). qmail should not under any circumstances corrupt the > > message, which might contain any character sequence. > > Right, that's the conundrum. It has to be in the body to be useful, > yet it cannot be in the body. Maybe a magical header which means > "When you see X, substitute the envelope recipient"? Like this: > > VERB-Substitute: 4jiu%8@#l > > No header, no body munging. How about a header like: X-Append: To unsubscribe send mail to: qmail-unsubsribe-$USER=$[EMAIL PROTECTED] And then the contents of that header get appended to the end of the message. That way you don't actually have to alter the contents of the message at all. - Keith > -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Fwd: Fwd: Re: Unsubscribe info
Here's a copy of the message I sent to the ezmlm mailing list, and the detailed reply I got from Fred Lindberg describing why ezmlm can't do the rewriting and how qmail would have to do it. - Keith - Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Subject: Fwd: Re: Unsubscribe info From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 21:54:14 - Begin forwarded message: Original Article: http://www.egroups.com/list/djb-ezmlm/?start=884 On Fri, 9 Oct 1998 12:41:42 +0200, Keith Burdis wrote: > So (and I finally get to the point), I would like for the unsubscription > info for each subscriber to appear at the end of each message. eg. > >To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a message to: > > list-unsubscribe-user=userhost@host > > That way it is pretty clear what address they are subscribed under and what > they have to do to unsubscribe. Yes, that would be very nice. Unfortunately, ezmlm sends out only one message per post, _not_ one per subscriber. Thus, this would require qmail support for VERP expansion and header addition (least unlikely), VERP expansion in arbitrary header. In the message body is "impossible", since that might lead to message corruption. Unfortunately, this would require some major redoing of qmail. At the moment, qmail-send does the expansion for SENDER (the message incl headers is not altered), then qmail-lspawn/rspawn pass it on to qmail-remote/local. In -local there are several places for delivery. In order to still keep it one message per post in the queue, the new header/header-expansion would have to be done by qmail-remote/local. THe other alternative, sending one message per recipient would have a severe impact on ezmlm efficiency (10k message x 10k recipients = 100 M queue space) and require a complete redesign of ezmlm to deal with failures after a subset of messages have been sent. This is "impossible". -Sincerely, Fred (Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA) - End forwarded message - -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: VERB
On Tue 1999-01-19 (20:11), Russell Nelson wrote: > Okay, VERP has solved the bounce problem. Now we need VERB (Variable > Envelope Recipient in Body) to solve the unsubscribe problem. > Basically, we need qmail-remote to merge the envelope recipient into > the message somewhere. The problem, of course, is *where* to insert > it. What I did for one customer is to insert it whenever a certain > magical character sequence was seen. This worked for them because > they could ensure that that magical sequence only appeared where they > wanted it. So how do we ensure that out-of-band data (the insertion > point marker) doesn't get confused with in-band data (the email > message itself). > > In case it's not obvious what I'm getting at, imagine if you could say: > -- > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > instead of the usual: > -- > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I asked about something like this on the ezmlm list, because one of our list admins was having problems with people being subscribed under addresses different to the address they thought they were subscribed under. (Mostly Windoze users that didn't read the confirmation message and/or deleted it). This meant that the list admin had to manually remove users when they complained of not being able to unsubscribe, usually to the mail list with a few explecitives attached. Sometimes the admin had to make a guess at what the subscriber's address was and hope that some innocent bystander didn't get caught in the crossfire. Perhaps this rewriting could be restricted to the last line of the message, and then you could have something like: To unsubscribe, send mail to: qmail-unsubscribe-?USER?=?HOST?@list.cr.yp.to with qmail-remote rewriting ?USER? and ?HOST?. But that's not an optimal solution. Are there any characters that are not allowed in SMTP messages? I thought about from my reading of Dan's web page LF's can appear in the middle of a message. - Keith > -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Re: Strange happenings
On Tue 1999-01-12 (07:47), D. J. Bernstein wrote: > Keith Burdis writes: > > Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.587557 delivery 264461: failure: > > Unable_to_run_qmail-remote./ > > Your OS provides monitoring tools to explain what's going on. Start by > tracing qmail-rspawn and figuring out what trouble it's having. Okay, I'll do that the next time it happens. > > Also, according to the list maintainer the message gets bounced. > > What message? What does the bounce say? What's the problem? The error messages says "Unable to run qmail-remote". - Keith > ---Dan -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
Strange happenings
Hi all
We run a large mailing list on our machine, so I created a seperate queue
for it and seperate binaries etc., and it all runs fine most of the time.
Then, out of the blue, suddenly we get no messages being delivered, and
"Unable to run qmail-remote./" messages in the logs. Restarting qmail fixes
the problem.
The first time it happened was on 18 December, and my daily mail stats
shows:
Reasons for failure
...
8553 2132.38 Unable to run qmail-remote./
After restarting it worked fine until 11 January (yesterday).
My stats again say:
Reasons for failure
...
3921 931.41 Unable to run qmail-remote./
I see this in my logs.
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.196092 new msg 460309
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.197725 info msg 460309: bytes 1089
from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]@[]> qp 4552 uid 2400
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.397684 starting delivery 264456:
msg 460310 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.400507 status: local 1/10 remote
1/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.402467 starting delivery 264457:
msg 460309 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.407536 status: local 1/10 remote
2/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.420554 starting delivery 264458:
msg 460309 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.422398 status: local 1/10 remote
3/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.423533 starting delivery 264459:
msg 460309 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.424691 status: local 2/10 remote
3/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.425840 starting delivery 264460:
msg 460309 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
... (keeps going up)
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.555136 status: local 2/10 remote
49/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.556371 starting delivery 264509:
msg 460309 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.557545 status: local 2/10 remote
50/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.558746 delivery 264459: success:
did_1+0+1/
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.580391 status: local 1/10 remote
50/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.587557 delivery 264461: failure:
Unable_to_run_qmail-remote./
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.609178 status: local 1/10 remote
49/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.623411 delivery 264462: failure:
Unable_to_run_qmail-remote./
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.624622 status: local 1/10 remote
48/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.625743 delivery 264463: failure:
Unable_to_run_qmail-remote./
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.626909 status: local 1/10 remote
47/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.628034 delivery 264464: failure:
Unable_to_run_qmail-remote./
... (keeps going down)
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.673524 status: local 1/10 remote
15/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.673745 delivery 264496: failure:
Unable_to_run_qmail-remote./
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.673960 status: local 1/10 remote
14/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.674183 delivery 264497: failure:
Unable_to_run_qmail-remote./
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.674399 status: local 1/10 remote
13/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.744941 delivery 264456: success:
ezmlm-return:_info:_trash_address/did_0+0+2/
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.761693 status: local 0/10 remote
50/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.763364 end msg 460310
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.823126 delivery 264510: failure:
Unable_to_run_qmail-remote./
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.846005 status: local 0/10 remote
49/50
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.857190 delivery 264511: failure:
Unable_to_run_qmail-remote./
...
and then it carries on with no remote mail being delivered. Also, according
to the list maintainer the message gets bounced.
When would qmail-remote not be able to run?
It should have enough file handles and processes available since I do a
ulimit before starting qmail, and it runs fine most of the time.
If it an OS problem I'll be much happier :-)
Also, what does the line:
Jan 11 02:57:05 rucus qmail2: 916016225.744941 delivery 264456: success:
ezmlm-return:_info:_trash_address/did_0+0+2/
mean?
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks.
- Keith
--
Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa
Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/
IRC : Panthras JAPH
"Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script"
Standard disclaimer.
---
Re: qmail stats vs. sendmail stats
On Mon 1999-01-11 (17:59), James DeMong wrote: > Hi, > > I want to compare qmailanalog stats vs. comparable stats for sendmail. > > Question #1: How do I generate similar stats for sendmail? Well, I don't know sendmail, but you can do the opposite and generate sendmail-like stats for qmail, using the zsendmail script in qmailanalog. - Keith -- Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/ IRC : Panthras JAPH "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script" Standard disclaimer. ---
