Re: Ensuring only one svscan per directory
Michael T\. Babcock [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I realise that this is a misconfiguration, but wouldn't it be possible for svscan to add a 'lock' file to the services directory so it only starts once? setlock -n /path/to/lockfile svscan /service URL:http://cr.yp.to/daemontools/setlock.html paul
Re: qmail ezmlm
Bird [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: i aready have qmail and ezmlm for maillist, i make [EMAIL PROTECTED] as maillist , why if i send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] , qmail not found this mailbox , That should be test-subscribe, as someone else said. it's work only if i do with manually with ezmlm-sub what wrong with my qmail setting or ezmlm-idx ? You ran ezmlm-sub as root; that breaks things. To fix: chown -R popuser:popuser /var/qmail/popboxes/whateverdomain.com/test In the future, if you use ezmlm-(un)sub, run them as popuser, not root or any other user. I think ezmlm-(un)sub ought to print an error and die if it's not running as the owner of the list. That would prevent problems of this sort. paul
Re: to supervise or not to supervise
"Peter Brezny" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What are the primary advantages of using supervise? Among those already mentioned: reliability. You *can't* reliably manage a service without cooperation from the parent process or the process itself. Putting the management functionality into the process itself results in unnecessary duplication; putting it in the parent results in supervise. An example of the kind of unreliability you get without supervise: suppose you want to send a service a signal. How do you find the pid? ps? Command names are not a perfect indicator; multiple instances complicate the problem. A pid file? It might be out of date: the process might have died since the pid file was written, and the pid might have been reused. But a parent can always keep track of its children; supervise never sends signals to the wrong process. paul
Re: Qmail and GFS
Charles Cazabon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So for safety, you either have to mount the filesystem with synchonous metadata (as I said above), But AIUI, you can't mount the filesystem so that *only* metadata is synchronous. The sync option makes *all* operations synchronous, so performance suffers. Do I have that right? paul
Re: is there a filter to scan message header and reject accordingly
Wolfgang Zeikat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In the previous episode (29.01.2001), Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: #!/bin/bash #~/filter cat /tmp/to$RECIPIENT.txt if [ "$(grep 'Subject: whatever' /tmp/to$RECIPIENT.txt)" = "Subject: whatever" ] then cat "/tmp/to$RECIPIENT.txt" | qmail-inject devnul else cat "/tmp/to$RECIPIENT.txt" | qmail-inject $USER-real fi rm -f /tmp/to$RECIPIENT.txt /var/qmail/alias/.qmail-devnul will delete every mail sent to devnul Why not just not re-inject it? i wasnt sure if i could use that "if" construction directly in a .qmail file (can that be done?), Yes, but only the entire shell script is all on one line (with commands separated by semicolons instead of newlines). I'd rewrite the whole thing into a .qmail file like this: |exec /dev/null 21; 822field subject | grep 'whatever' exit 99; exit 0 |forward other-address Also note that the original request was for scanning outgoing mail as well. .qmail files can't help there. paul
Re: Why so few qmail-remote processes
Greg White [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 09:30:35PM -0500, Paul Jarc wrote: If you really want to retry failed deliveries more often, send qmail-send SIGHUP every once in a while. I'm no wizard or anything, but isn't ALRM the signal you want for that? Doesn't HUP just reread locals and rcpthosts? Right, sorry. /me rereads man qmail-send. paul
Re: Subtle qmail bug? (was Re: Handling an MX record of 0.0.0.0 o r 127.0.0.1)
Scott Gifford [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It means that a user sending a steady stream of 10 (small) messages/sec over a dialup connection makes your system deal with 600 messages/sec, which would normally take a T1. But this doesn't involve any real network connections - it's all on loopback. So it wouldn't saturate an actual T1, if that's what you were saying. Right? paul
Re: Why so few qmail-remote processes
"Jacques Frip' WERNERT" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I know that well so I put "5" but I can't take too much time to send my mails ... Reducing queuelifetime will not help you deliver mail faster. If you really want to retry failed deliveries more often, send qmail-send SIGHUP every once in a while. paul
Re: Create a bounce message?
"Hubbard, David" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I was wondering if someone could tell me how to create a bounce message, or what would fool a remote mail server into thinking it was a bounce message? You can use bouncesaying in your .qmail file if you know how to programmatically detect the kind of message you want to reply to. Otherwise, create a .qmail-bounce file to handle a you-bounce address, and put bouncesaying (or any command that exits 100) in that file. Then send a message to you-bounce. The envelope sender of this message should be the address that you want the bounce to go to. paul
conf-spawn
Suppose my concurrencylocal and concurrencyremote will never be greater than, say, 50. Is there then any penalty in setting conf-spawn to 100? More to the point, is there any reason not to set conf-spawn to the largest value possible, other than portability? paul
Re: Svscan
Gavin McCord [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've created the /service directory with the necessary permissions and added on one line SV:123456:respawn:env - PATH=/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/bin svscan /service /dev/null /dev/console 2/dev/console This should all be on one line. Maybe it was your mailer that wrapped it, but if not, fix it. However, having HUPped init, there's no new svscan running. I say new because there is an svscan running the qmail programs. How was your old svscan invoked? If it was done by an inittab line that started with SV:, then init thinks this new configuration is supposed to be the same instance. Can I run two svscans, or is there a conflict there? If so, what's the best way to reconcile the /var/qmail/supervise and /service directories. You can run two svscans in different directories, but it'd be better to have just one running in /service. Make symlinks in /service to your qmail service directories, start svscan there, and then (if you want to stop the harmless warnings) svc -dx each of the qmail service directories (including their log directories). paul
Re: Good MUAs
Alex Le Fevre [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My question today comes after further reading of the included documentation. It says that Pine and Elm are both insecure and unstable, and that BSD mail is worse. However, it makes no mention of a good MUA. What would you all recommend, and where could I get it? I need clients for both my OpenBSD box and eventual Windows clients (for whom I am considering building a POP "toaster"). Emacs runs on both Unix and Windows, so you could use Gnus. It's exceedingly reconfigurable, and it can get mail from lots of different kinds of sources, including POP for your Windows users, and maildir for your Unix users. paul
Re: tcpserver question (OT)
Mario Thaten [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What I depend on, are the services, that are considered internal by xinetd (daytime, time, echo, discard). It's more likely that you don't depend on them, but since they're turned on by default, you think something might break if you turn them off. But if you really want to run them: tcpserver 0 discard sh -c 'exec cat /dev/null' tcpserver 0 echo cat tcpserver 0 daytime daytimed (Get my daytimed from URL:http://multivac.cwru.edu/prj-utils/daytimed.c.) I don't have a tcpserver time implementation, but it'd be easy enough to write one. Read RFC 868 for the definition. paul
Re: Multiple instances of qmail...
Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My question is, is it possible to run multiple instances of qmail, sharing the same disk structure, configuration, etc.. No. The queue cannot be shared by multiple instances of qmail. OTOH, everything else (binaries, configuration, addresses) can be shared. Then if one queue disk dies, you've lost any mail that was in it, but other mail will be unaffected. paul
Re: why so few qmail-remote processes ...
"Jacques Frip' WERNERT" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: in fact I trying to know why I can see sometimes 100 qmail-remote processes and sometimes only 10 with many messages in my queue (ie 200). So why qmail-send is not asking rspawn to fork much more ... After a delivery attempt fails, qmail waits a while before retrying it. If it failed once, it's likely it'll fail again if you retry immediately, so that would be wasted effort. paul
Re: LWQ - Which log contains what?
Clemens Hermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If I want to generate statistics and I use only the logs in /var/log/qmail (and I skip the ones in the smtpd subdir) do I then catch any mail that comes to/leaves/passes my server? Yes. The smtpd logs record only the arrival of messages through qmail-smtpd. All other processing of those and other messages is recorded in the main log directory. paul
Re: A firestorm of protest?
Henning Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I see exactly two patches which could be part of stock qmail: the AOL dns patch More likely, qmail will be updated to use the djbdns client library. AIUI, this would solve the 512-byte-response problem. paul
Re: maildir error
Durham David R CNTR AMC CSS/SAS [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: /var/log/maillog says "Unable_to_open_./maildir:_is_a_directory._(#4.2.1)" You forgot the / at the end of the delivery instruction line. "./maildir" means "deliver to an mbox called ./maildir"; "./maildir/" means what you want. paul
Re: OpenBSD's MUA
Alex Le Fevre [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: since I don't even know what an MUA is, I can't tell if my OS supports it. "Mail user agent". I.e., the program you use to read your mail. It's not especially closely related to your OS. Two MUAs I know of that support maildirs are Mutt and Gnus. Jan 18 12:21:49 www qmail: 979838509.343842 delivery 1: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/ ... /home/alex/.qmail and /home/alex/.qmail-alex both exist, containing simply ./Maildir/. /home/alex/Maildir also exists. Did you create your Maildir with maildirmake? Is it owned by the same UID that appears in /var/qmail/users/assign or /etc/passwd for "alex"? What are the permissions? paul
Re: TCPSERVER logs :
"Alex Kramarov" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I was thinking , why do alot of people here mention running tcpserver with multilog and storing it's logs apart from qmail logs: Because things work that way. This is what I use for the startup string for tcpserver /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -R -H -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -v -u 7770 -g 2108 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/tcp-env /usr/sbin/relaylock /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd /var/log/qmail/current 21 This makes tcpserver always log to the same file. After it has run for a while, multilog will have renamed that file from "current" to "@4000..." and created a new "current" file, but tcpserver won't use the new current file unless you kill it and restart it. Eventually, if tcpserver runs long enough, multilog will rotate the original "current" out of existence, and you won't be able to see new tcpserver log entries. I have to rewrite the FROM field from messages I recieve through smtp. The header field, or the envelope sender? paul
Re: looking for mua
"Robin S. Socha" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: mutt is pretty nifty. Another good choice would be Gnus http://www.gnus.org/ which also supports Maildir natively if you use nnmaildir. Since Google doesn't find it, I'll say that nnmaildir lives at URL:http://multivac.cwru.edu/nnmaildir/ Otherwise, Maildir is available as a regular mail backend. Which is to say: the other backends can read incoming mail from a maildir, but they store it in some other format. AFAIK, nnmaildir is the only (existing) way to make Gnus store mail in a maildir. paul
Re: In a perfect world
Felix von Leitner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thus spake Russell Nelson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): In a perfect world, QMTP would require that a qmtpd accept VERP-formatted envelope senders. Doesn't qmail-qmtpd accept VERPs? Yes, but it's not required by the QMTP protocol. It's just an extension that qmail provides. paul
Re: Dot in email adress
"Mark Delany" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 02:31:56PM -0500, Dave Sill wrote: "David L. Nicol" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: that man page [dot-qmail] says: WARNING: For security, qmail-local replaces any dots in ext with colons before checking .qmail-ext. For convenience, qmail-local converts any uppercase letters in ext to lowercase. What exactly is the threat this is supposed to guard against? Is it directory descending on vms, or access to the .. directory somehow? It's guarding against ascending via "..". That's the assumption, but which Unixen legitimately traverses based on a name like .qmail-../../../etc/passwd? The dash field need not be "-". In particular, it can end in "/", so that ".." in ext would work, if left unaltered. paul
Re: Dot in email adress
"Mark Delany" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Understand, but I can't seem to get past the OS wanting the first component to be a directory. Right, it does - or rather, *every* component, except the last. I guess if people had a .qmail directory... As I do. But is there a way without the recipient doing something silly? If you have a .qmail directory, and a +user- line in users/assign, a sender could send to user-../foo@host to access .qmail/../foo as a .qmail delivery file. paul
Re: How do I use binmail (aka mail(1))
Medi Montaseri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: My hostname is 'samba.sc.prepass.com' control/me contains mail.sc.prepass.com as mail is a CNAME to samba control/locals contain 'sc.prepass.com' and '.sc.prepass.com' I don't think locals lets you use wildcards like that. You have to list every domain explicitly. If you have no defaultdomain, it defaults to your me, which is not included in your locals. So you can either provide a defaultdomain that is in your locals, or include your me in your locals - which you should probably do anyway. paul
Re: [o/t] email client recommendations?
Marc Koop writes: I was wondering if some of you could recommend a good, reliable email client that runs under X (Gnome) and supports IMAP to maildirs (qmail, of course!). A gui client would be nice, but is not necessary. What do you guys/gals use?!? I'm big into emacs, so I use Gnus for reading mail and news. I noticed that Gnus's maildir support was somewhat lacking, so I wrote a maildir backend. URL:http://multivac.cwru.edu/nnmaildir/ paul
Re: secrets and lies
Felix von Leitner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thus spake Raul Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Pulling something off of a web site involves creating a copy on your local machine. Please enlighten me: who bullshitted you Americans into believing that one needs a license to use software? Raul wasn't talking about using software. He was talking about obtaining software. Or that software is patentable? Programs - or rather, algorithms - *are* patentable in the US. You may think this is a ridiculous idea, and I may agree with you, but it's true nonetheless. paul
Re: secrets and lies
"Michael T. Babcock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since the author gives no implicit license, we all come down to IANAL legal battles over what is implied by his other writings. A license would clear (most of) this up -- that's the issue. A license has the potential to be just as ill-worded, confusing, or extremely technical as anything else. A clearly worded, easily supportable legal document would be good, regardless of whether it were a license. When talking about what might be the correct interpretation of the law, it says "Some people think ..." and "Other people ...". It doesn't say "I think". He re-iterates specific thoughts in the form of hearsay. The overall picture of the file is his theory on implied rights of the user of software. Since he does not quote case law (which would be valid in the USA or Canada at least) or other legal documents, the majority of that file constitues DJB's theories. Now I understand this, but summing it up as just "Dan's theories" is misleading. (I, for one, was misled.) He's describing others' theories. His descriptions may or may not be accurate, but the theories themselves are not Dan's. The descriptions are his, and you might call them theories too, but that's how you got me confused. Are you saying that these are simply false statements, and that no one actually holds the views that Dan says some do? That's not necessary for what I said originally, and you know it I didn't know that, because I misunderstood you. -- so its not worth a flame-war, is it? No, so it's a good thing we haven't started one. In fact, there's no guarantee that any document would form a legally binding contract as contracts must be accepted by both parties in many (most?) countries and "click" style licensing has proven not binding in some countries. Right. So a non-contractual license wouldn't necessarily be better than a non-contractual, non-license legal statement. This is a point the GPL (just an example) makes by reminding the user that they can either accept the license as given, or ignore it, but if they choose to ignore it, they get no rights whatsoever to modification or redistribution. Yes, although that statement is incorrect WRT modification, AFAICT. If I really cared, I'd want a signed document from the University. Otherwise, the present situation is as good as any other. The present situation is clearly not as good as a well-written license and disclaimer. The present documents are as good as a license *for some purposes*. For other purposes, such as packaging, we'd want irrevocable permission to redistribute. But this permission need not take the form of a license, and a license need not grant that permission. The ideas are compatible, and often come together, but they're orthogonal. I'll agree that a disclaimer might be beneficial in either case for good-faith purposes; I don't know enough to support or refute that. paul
Re: secrets and lies
"Michael T. Babcock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Paul Jarc wrote: ... I don't see ambiguity in them [dist.html or softwarelaw.html or rights.html] ... Are you not as analytical as those who criticise the situation? Not that I'm aware of. As I said, I think it's just that when information is not given, it's called "ambiguity" by some, and not by others (such as me). paul
Re: secrets and lies
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 10:34:23AM -0500, Michael T. Babcock wrote: He wrote it all -- its all DJB's theories -- they may be right or wrong, but he's not a lawyer so its not even really worth trusting his theories at all. Except that ... [2] he provides very specific legal references, including a hyperlink to the text of the relevant law. That's true of softwarelaw.html, but this bit of the thread was about rights.html, which includes no such references. paul
Re: secrets and lies
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 05:16:17PM -0500, Paul Jarc wrote: That's true of softwarelaw.html, but this bit of the thread was about rights.html, which includes no such references. rights.html doesn't say anything about the licensing of djbdns. I know. Neither does anything else on cr.yp.to; djbdns isn't licensed at all. Instead, it poses the question: do you have the legal right to use the web, in the absence of explicit copyright notices on every document element you encounter? It's an interesting question, but I don't see that the discussion in this thread really relates to that issue. It came up in message 5952. This branch of the thread is descended from there. dns-get. messages 5952, 5959, 5971, 5996, and 5997 if you want to review. paul
Re: secrets and lies
"Al" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Here is a question: Does anyone know if the GPL and/or BSD license has ever been challenged in court? What were the results? The GPL hasn't - so its meaning really isn't known yet - but the BSD license has. I don't remember the case, but people are still using the BSD license, which is a good sign that it means pretty much what it seems to mean. The reason I ask this is until there is case law that supports what is put forth in these style of agreements then someone may not want to release their software into that realm. Yes, and I think some do shy away from the GPL for that reason. But Dan wants to prevent forking, which is incompatible with Free licenses. paul
Re: secrets and lies
"Michael T. Babcock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Paul Jarc wrote: A license has the potential to be just as ill-worded, confusing, or extremely technical as anything else. A clearly worded, easily supportable legal document would be good, regardless of whether it were a license. As DJB has said ... 'so?' So if you want a clear, legally binding statement of your rights, ask for a clear, legally binding statement of your rights, not a license. A license will satisfy a request for a license, but need not satisfy those making the request if they actually wanted something else. Right. So a non-contractual license wouldn't necessarily be better than a non-contractual, non-license legal statement. Yes, it would be -- because (as I understand it) you have the right to waive your rights -- such as by putting something into the public domain (as Dan has done with libtai). Yes, and that's an example of a non-contractual, non-license legal statement that gives you clear rights, and so isn't any worse than a license. paul
Re: secrets and lies
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 09:05:04PM -0500, Paul Jarc wrote: : I don't know which of these theories will succeed in court. I also : don't think you should have to care. So I promise I won't sue you : for copyright violation for downloading documents from my server. which makes it clear to me that downloading, e.g., qmail-1.03.tar.gz won't get me in trouble. Unless Dan decides at a later date to remove that page from his website. At that point, how will you prove that you obtained the software legitimately? The same way as if rights.html were included in qmail-1.03.tar.gz: I'd ask people who had copies to present them, to support my claim. There would be more such copies if it were included in qmail-1.03.tar.gz, but I'm not going to waste time worrying about it. It's the same situation as with, say, Emacs. The GPL doesn't give you permission to get a copy of Emacs; it only specifies what you can do once you have. The nearest I could find to explicit permission to download it is "By FTP we provide source code for all GNU software, free of charge." at URL:http://www.gnu.org/software/software.html#HowToGetSoftware, and that covers only the GNU site itself, not mirrors. I think rights.html is clearer. paul
Re: secrets and lies
"Michael T. Babcock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Paul Jarc wrote: "Pavel Kankovsky" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But there are ABSOLUTELY no references to dist.html or softwarelaw.html in the source tarballs. So what? So when a lot of people download the files, they don't know what the licensing is and have to ask on the list(s) True, but not relevant to the question of what is legal. I see no theories of his [in rights.html]. The only part there he attributes to himself is: He wrote it all -- its all DJB's theories -- they may be right or wrong, but he's not a lawyer so its not even really worth trusting his theories at all. Have you even read rights.html? When talking about what might be the correct interpretation of the law, it says "Some people think ..." and "Other people ...". It doesn't say "I think". Are you saying that these are simply false statements, and that no one actually holds the views that Dan says some do? Even if so, why does it matter? He says "I promise I won't sue you for copyright violation for downloading documents from my server." Would you be more satisfied with something like "I hereby waive my right to sue ..."? It still wouldn't be a contract. He could still go back and edit it. You'd still need others' copies to support your claim that you got it legally. which makes it clear to me that downloading, e.g., qmail-1.03.tar.gz won't get me in trouble. No, because there's no statement about whether the University he works at thinks that they own the Copyright on software he may have worked on while being paid by them -- he doesn't include a waiver statement by them either. There's also no statement that he wrote any of his software on the University's time. He could publish a statement (by himself, or by University officials) that he in fact is the copyright holder, but why would you trust such an explicit statement over the implicit one, since that statement could be false anyway? If I really cared, I'd want a signed document from the University. Otherwise, the present situation is as good as any other. paul
Re: secrets and lies
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I want an unambiguous license included with the software that explicitly defines what I am allowed to do with it. If you don't need that then fine, but please don't argue that it's not needed, because there are clearly a number of people on this list that desire it. Please don't confuse need with desire. You may not like dist.html or softwarelaw.html or rights.html, but I don't see ambiguity in them, and I don't see how including them in the software distributions would make them any more legally significant. paul
Re: run file suddenly disappear!!
Mate Wierdl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 01:58:13PM +0800, Eric Yu wrote: the log directory for qmail-smtpd is /var/log/qmail/smtpd Yes, but the logdir for qmail-send is /var/log/qmail !! But this should not cause problems. multilog (running in /var/log/qmail) won't notice or touch any file named "smtpd". paul
Re: secrets and lies
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Maybe he'd think about changing dist.html. After he changed it, could I then continue distributing this package without fear of being sued? If the new dist.html said no, then it would seem clear that you couldn't. This is not an ambiguity in the current or potential future dist.html, but I think I see your point now: you want to know what you will *always* be allowed to do with qmail, not just what you are allowed to do today. (Right?) Well, barring future changes in copyright law (which could potentially invalidate *any* statement we might make today), you will always be allowed to patch, compile, back up, and run qmail. You will always be allowed to distribute your patches, since you hold copyright on them (I think). Additionally, you can redistribute vanilla qmail today. You do not have the guarantee that you will always be allowed to redistribute qmail, but this is not ambiguous - it's clearly, if implicitly, unspecified. If you agree with this but call it "ambiguous" instead of "unspecified", then I guess we'll just have to be more careful how we use such words to avoid confusion. paul
Re: secrets and lies
"Michael T. Babcock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Paul Jarc wrote: The GPL doesn't give you permission to get a copy of Emacs; it only specifies what you can do once you have. For a lot of people, being able to obtain said software isn't the problem -- its the right to use it in the ways they wish to do so in the long term. Yes, I know, but the message I was responding to addressed this point specifically. paul
Re: secrets and lies
"Pavel Kankovsky" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But there are ABSOLUTELY no references to dist.html or softwarelaw.html in the source tarballs. So what? Moreover, softwarelaw.html is about using the software ``once you've legally downloaded [it]'', dist.html is about (re)distribution of qmail (again, once you've...). The mere fact something is published on the Internet does not make downloading it legal (DJB's theories in http://cr.yp.to/rights.html notwithstanding), I see no theories of his there. The only part there he attributes to himself is: : I don't know which of these theories will succeed in court. I also : don't think you should have to care. So I promise I won't sue you : for copyright violation for downloading documents from my server. which makes it clear to me that downloading, e.g., qmail-1.03.tar.gz won't get me in trouble. paul
Re: secrets and lies
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 03:11:43PM -0500, Paul Jarc wrote: Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Not to mention that the whole point of freeware and open source software in general is to give everyone the ability to audit the software, not just a select few. Dan's software isn't open source. [...] I said, "freeware and open source software". Do you always selectively ignore part of what someone says to make your point? I ignored it because I wasn't sure what you meant, and it wouldn't matter much anyway. If by "freeware" you meant "Free Software" in the GNU sense, then Dan's software isn't that either, and I'd say Free Software isn't about auditability so much as customizability. If by "freeware" you meant "software that is available for zero price", then that doesn't imply the source is available, so there's obviously no inherent tie to easier auditability there. If by "freeware" you meant software that is distributed for free with source, then Dan's qualifies, but to say that auditability is the goal of *all* such software is a terribly strong statement, and as I said, I'm not aware of Dan ever stating that this was even *one* of *his* goals, let alone "the whole point". paul
Re: secrets and lies
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 03:35:35PM -0500, Paul Jarc wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Whilst an audit is a good idea, I don't see how a competition and time in the field can actual make matters worse. It can make people think a program is secure when no audit has been done, reducing the likelihood that anyone will call for an audit, leaving holes undiscovered. And a formal audit can miss security holes, reducing the likelihood that anyone will call for further audits, leaving holes undiscovered -- it's a double-edged sword. Auditing is an ongoing process, not something which takes place at one point in time and unilaterally declares something "secure". None of this conflicts with what I said above, though. An audit is more likely to find holes than is casual scrutiny in the field. An audit is likely to be better than no audit. paul
Re: secrets and lies
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 08:18:29PM +1300, Chris K. Young wrote: I say that dist.html should be considered authoritative. There are references in the qmail and djbdns documentation that contain the URL to their respective pages. That's what you say. But there isn't a definitive license (i.e. LICENSE or COPYING) in the qmail distribution that explains those rights There's nothing magical about those names. The names "dist.html" and "softwarelaw.html" are just as good, and I don't see why they should have to be included in the distribution. some web page could be altered or taken down at any time, leaving users without any rights whatsoever. IANAL (are you?), but I doubt that a copyright holder can revoke permission already granted in this way. The *record* (or rather, *one* record) of permission could be removed, but how does that affect the permission itself? paul
Re: secrets and lies
Ryan Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Mate Wierdl wrote: Indeed, it would be interesting what kind of testing he is running on qmail, say (he says there are over 100 tests), and how he is trying to make sure his software is secure. If you want to see some of the tests he does, check out rts.tests that comes in the djbdns distribution. That sort of thing has its place, but it's not really related to auditing at all. Mostly, it's good for detecting compilation problems. paul
Re: secrets and lies
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 02:39:25PM -0500, Dave Sill wrote: So has any expert ever audited qmail or djbdns? No. Any audit worth doing would be prohibitively expensive for a freeware project. $1000 wouldn't even begin to cover it, at least for qmail. Not to mention that the whole point of freeware and open source software in general is to give everyone the ability to audit the software, not just a select few. Dan's software isn't open source. I imagine he might value peer review, but I'm not aware of his having stated so - certainly not in regard to motivation for his distribution terms. Also, making source available does not give everyone the ability to audit the software. It gives them permission. But most people won't be any better able to do a quality audit for having the source. Only the "select few" will be able to audit it well, regardless of the license, and they can afford to charge a hefty fee, regardless of the license. paul
Re: secrets and lies
Mate Wierdl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So has any expert ever audited qmail or djbdns? I imagine Dan has, and many would consider him an expert, but one is rarely the best auditor of one's own work. paul
Re: secrets and lies
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Whilst an audit is a good idea, I don't see how a competition and time in the field can actual make matters worse. It can make people think a program is secure when no audit has been done, reducing the likelihood that anyone will call for an audit, leaving holes undiscovered. paul
Re: qmail and IP addresses.....
Vince Vielhaber [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Sean C Truman wrote: /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v 199.111.111.111 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd That will only allow hosts with the address 199.111.111.111 to connect, not connections to that address. You have that backwards. The command line will work as given above. Controlling where connections can come from is done with tcprules. paul
Re: Hard linking messages between maildirs
"Slider" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is an easier solution! If [EMAIL PROTECTED] wants all mail that goes to him to be copied to another maildir as well as for him to get a copy to go to another maildir. That doesn't cover my situation at all. This has nothing to do with delivery addresses. I just want my user agent to copy individual messages, selected by the user, from one maildir to another. paul
Hard linking messages between maildirs
I'm a maildir user agent. I've got a message in a maildir, and my user wants a copy of it in another maildir as well. If the maildirs are on the same filesystem, can I just make a hard link, or do I have to make a copy? The maildir specification doesn't explicitly address this, so a strict reading would say I should make a copy. If I just make links, will that break any existing maildir code? paul
Re: Clean queue
"Nguyen Hong Son" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: _ How to delete messages in queue ? This is answered at URL:http://qmail.sgi.net/qmail/top.html#tips. (grep for `week'.) First, identify the message you want to kill. The full message appears in /var/qmail/queue/mess/N/12345, where N is a number between 1 and conf-split, and 12345 is the inode number of the file. Then do: # touch -d '1 week ago' /var/qmail/queue/info/N/12345 The message will bounce as if it had been stuck in the queue for a week. _ How to extend queue (current is 23 ?) in qmail for a very busy server ? You'd have to recompile qmail and use a fresh installation, letting the old one run long enough to empty its queue. Once the queue split is set (in conf-split) at compile time, those binaries will be unusable for other queue sizes. paul
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
Peter van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 04:59:27PM -0400, Michael T. Babcock wrote: The encoded envelope sender address isn't expanded on beyond the examples given, but your proposal might give a good performance increase for very large lists (a la redhat.com lists, etc.). The qmtp documentation doesn't seem to mention VERP at all. VERP expansion is handled at the moment delivery is done, irregardless of how the message came in. By qmail, sure. But I'm asking about protocols. Does QMTP require servers to expand VERPs? I think it doesn't, which unfortunately means that a QMTP client can't send a single copy of a message with multiple recipients on the same host if it wants VERPs. paul
Re: Double Forwarding
"Neil D. Roberts" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have a mail queue called domain.es No, you have a virtual domain called domain.es. You have only one mail queue, and it is in /var/qmail/queue. (When you misuse the terminology like this, it's difficult to understand your question.) and it´s directory is /var/spool/queue/domain.es Virtual domains don't have directories, exactly. What I think you mean to say is that /var/spool/queue/domain.es is a maildir, and that it is also the home directory for domain.es mail, according to your control/virtualdomains and users/assign. The user wants to have his mail sent at "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" BUT this E-Mail has to split to two parts, one has to be the "new" directory so that it goes to the queue reciever, and the other has to go to his own mail account in the same server. So, I have created a file called .qmail-user and in this file I have placed "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" and on a new line, I have placed "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". [EMAIL PROTECTED] will, as you say, loop. You don't want to deliver the mail to that *address*; you're already doing that. Instead, you want to deliver it to the *maildir*. Change the [EMAIL PROTECTED] line to: /var/spool/queue/domain.es/ paul
Re: Default Delivery Question
Derek Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: . . . I want to try something like this, to achieve a global incoming mail filter without using any qmail-queue wrappers or modifications: qmail-start "|/var/qmail/bin/myfilter |tomaildir $HOME/Maildir" splogger qmail That should work, as long as myfilter and tomaildir behave properly. But it won't take effect when a .qmail file is found for a particular local address. The defaultdelivery gets passed from qmail-start to qmail-lspawn to qmail-local. qmail-local looks for a .qmail file and, if none is found, it slaps defaultdelivery into place and pretends that it found a .qmail file containing defaultdelivery. qmial-local uses it exactly as it would use the contents of the .qmail file. It can contain multiple delivery instructions, one per line, if you like, just as a .qmail file can. Do I need the quotes? Yes, it has to be passed as a single argument. paul
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
Peter van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 11:24:17AM -0400, Paul Jarc wrote: Does QMTP support per-recipient envelope senders for a single copy of a single message? qmail will happily expand VERP after a message has been entered thru SMTP/QMTP. But does QMTP require servers to do such expansion? If so, then when a mailing list server is delivering a message to several subscribers at a particular host, and the delivery is done over QMTP, a single copy can be sent with a to-be-expanded VERP. What I had in mind at first was a protocol that would have multiple sender, recipient tuples per message in the envelope. This would also allow a list server to send just a single copy to each host having subscribers. paul
Re: mail server location question
Bruce Edge [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I want to rely on the dns MX records on the firewall to route mail to the qmail server, which is on an internal LAN, with a non Internet routable 192.168.1 address. If you want mail to be able to get in, something that accepts mail has to be visible to the Internet. You could do this by putting the qmail machine outside the firewall, or by using NAT or the like on the firewall so that SMTP connections to the firewall get redirected to the qmail machine internally. But what you've described won't work - the world sees that, according to your MX records, mail for your domain should go to a certain host, but then that host can't be reached from the outside. paul
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
"Michael T. Babcock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: VERP was proposed by DJB as a way to identify bounce recipients. VERP requires that each recipient have their own From: as well as To:. Not quite: it's envelope senders and recipients, not To: and From: fields. (So recipients can still receive exactly the same message - with the same To: and From: fields - but with SMTP, the messages will need to be delivered separately, and they'll get different Delivered-To, Return-Path, and Received fields added during delivery.) Does QMTP support per-recipient envelope senders for a single copy of a single message? paul
Re: void main (no, not a long one)
Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Theoretically, "void main" is wrong. In practice, it works just fine. Personally, I could not care less. Theoretically, BIND's noncompliance with standards is wrong. In practice, it interoperates with most of the world (i.e., itself) just fine. But I care. paul
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
"Michael T. Babcock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Nathan J. Mehl" wrote: Qmail is not "open source software". Is not now. Has never been. In all probability never will be. You are free to tell me where I was supposed to agree to a license agreement before downloading it Those license agreements are not legally binding. See URL:http://cr.yp.to/softwarelaw.html. Also, the existence (as opposed to the content) of those license agreements have nothing whatsoever to do with the definition of Open Source software. See URL:http://www.opensource.org/osd.html. qmail's license does not meet these requirements. and/or where the LICENSE file is and/or where the license is embedded in C source files ... The license terms aren't not required to be distributed along with the material they apply to in order to be legally binding. paul
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
"Michael T. Babcock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That said, I have still seen nothing about the licensing of his software besides that he doesn't care about anything that isn't implicitly illegal. See URL:http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html. paul
Re: Yet another /var/spool/mail questions
Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The qmail delivery agent *only* delivers to mailboxes under the user's home directory. Well, qmail-local can deliver to maildirs or mboxes anywhere, but there's no way to describe a maildir or mbox in a user-dependent way except by using a path relative to the user's home directory. So /var/spool/mail/user can be used in users' .qmail files, but not as the default delivery instruction. paul
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
Mark Mentovai [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If an MTA receives a message with 100 recipients with the same MX, there is no reason to transfer the message to the remote mail exchanger 100 times. Yes, there is: per-recipient VERPs. You may not see this as outweighing the bandwidth issue, but it's still a reason in favor of individual transfers, given the limits of SMTP. paul
Re: orbs.org accuses qmail of mailbomb relaying!
"Frank Tegtmeyer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yes, there is: per-recipient VERPs. If VERPs are used you have different senders. So bundling receivers of the same message at one host is a non issue at all (at least with SMTP). That's my point: VERPs are good, but using them requires sending one copy of a message for each recipient. So if you wanted to send a single copy with multiple recipients, you'd have to sacrifice VERPs. paul
Re: SMTP question.
Z [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I was wondering if there was a way that I can have SMTP do a database lookup in order to find out where the mail should be delivered. What i mean is let's say that the SMTP server gets a request for [EMAIL PROTECTED] I need it to search in a mySQL database with the extracted information (bob, barker, myserver). This question has nothing to do with SMTP; it's about delivery, not receipt. qmail won't do a database lookup on the fly, but you can use virtual domains and extract your database information into your /var/qmail/users/assign file to get the same functionality. paul
Re: more forced queueing
"M.B." [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I had a similar question a while back to which Russell was kind enough to suggest a fix: to queue all *inbound mail* just modify qmail-getpw to _exit(111). Note that this won't take effect for addresses listed in users/assign. qmail-lspawn invokes qmail-getpw only if it can't find a matching entry in users/assign (well, users/cdb, technically). paul
Re: very urgent :qq Truoble in home directory
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: what i have to write in my "inetd.conf" to make qmail-smtpd run under inetd.conf , i have gone through the docs but thats not working for me smtp stream nowait qmaild /var/qmail/bin/tcp-env \ tcp-env /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd Many files allow you to split long lines across multiple lines by ending a line with \. inetd.conf doesn't allow this, so remove the \ and put all that on one line. paul
Re: tcpserver pop3
Federico Barbazza writes: i installed tcpserver to run for pop3. this is my code line: "tcpserver -u 0 -g 0 -c 100 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup hostname checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir " Is it rigtht to launch tcpserver as root??? tcpserver must be run as root initially so that it can listen on port 25. So it's useless to give it `-u 0 -g 0'; it already is running as those ids. You probably want to have it change to user qmaild and group nofiles. See URL:http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#start-qmail. paul
Re: and yet another NEWBIE question
now, i dont want to have /home/dom1-sales/Mailbox and /home/dom2-sales/Mailbox but instead have /mailuser/dom1-sales/Mailbox and /mailuser/dom2-sales/Mailbox is this possible and if so, how? You can make entries for these addresses in /var/qmail/users/assign, and let the homedir field be /mailuser/dom1-sales, etc. Or if these addresses have system accounts (which doesn't necessarily sound like the best way to do it, but it seems that's what you're doing), then you can let /mailuser/dom1-sales be the actual home directory for the dom1-sales user. (How to change an account's home directory depends on the kind of system you have; check your system documentation, we won't necessarily be able to help you.) also, i inserted the command for pop3 as described in life with qmail into the inetd.conf when i test is as instructed on the machine itself it works great but when i telnet to 110 from another machine, the authentication always doesnt accept the password... What exactly did you do to test it? What exactly are you doing when it fails? paul
Re: tcprulescheck
Andrew Hill writes: "Brian D. Winters" wrote: TCPREMOTEIP=203.34.190.170 tcprulescheck /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb Well, I don't know what parts you are carefully reading that indicate that you should use the above command, becuase to me, the page says to use the command: tcprulescheck cdb sh-compatible shells let you set environment variables for just a single command by putting the assignments in front of the command. Brian's using the same command as you, but using a different way of setting the environment variable. Hmm... have you tried setting all three variables? paul
Re: batch unsubs and subs
Hand, Brian C. writes: if a have a large list say 325000+ address to add or delete to a mailing list and have them in a text file. one address per line. can ezmlm-unsub or sub be made to patch them all at once. ezmlm-sub accepts multiple addresses on the command line. Do: $ ezmlm-sub list-dir `cat subscribers-file` Likewise for ezmlm-unsub. This assumes there is no whitespace in the addresses - if there is any, you'll have to use somthing more sophisticated than `cat`. paul
Re: Help with 'config-fast'
Hart, Neil writes:
I plan to use qmail in a mail-server, using a dial-up ISP account and
feeding Windows PCs with their mail. This Linux box, does not have an
address that would be known by a DNS. Therefore, I am not sure what the
'full.host.name' is in my situation. Does it mean 'localhost.localdomain'
or does it mean '10.0.0.1' (the IP address I've assigned to it)?
It may be less confusing in this case to skip config-fast and set up
the control files yourself (which is all config-fast does). Check out
the qmail-control man page to see where to find info about each file.
The ones config-fast sets up are control/{locals,rcpthosts} (affecting
all incoming mail), control/{defaultdomain,plusdomain} (affecting
locally incoming mail), and control/meme (used as a default for
several other files). The first four should be fairly
straightforward; I'm not sure what would be best for you to put in
control/me. You might just create all the other control files - that
way, control/me will never be consulted, and you'll make sure each
file contains something appropriate for its particular purpose.
paul
Re: Doh!! Newbie dumb question!! ucspi installed or not?
Steven M. Klass writes: I'm getting ready to press forward, and install vpopmail. Now I know that I have ucspi source files, but I don't know how to check to see if it's installed.. If you know you built it, and you still have the build directory, look at conf-home to see where it would be installed. Look for tcpserver in `head -1 conf-home`/bin. If you don't have a build directory, check anywhere you think you might have installed it - /usr/local/bin, /usr/bin, paul
Re: Help! Qmail tells me domain not found in rcphosts
Jochen E. Führing writes: If I try to mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to another domain, like list.cr.yp.to, my qmail refuses to take the mail with this message : "domain not found in rcphosts" I don't understand! pcsystems.de is in the rcphosts. I can't put every domain in this file I want to mail to! Nor should you - that would make you an open relay. Look at URL:http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#relaying and URL:http://www.palomine.net/qmail/selectiverelay.html. paul
Re: Help! Qmail tells me domain not found in rcphosts
Jochen E. Führing writes: But in fact, the domain where the mail is coming from IS in rcphosts! That doesn't matter; rcpthosts is checked against where the mail is *going*. qmail will receive mail on behalf of whichever domains are listed there. So it's useless for controlling who you receive mail *from*. paul
Re: Alias Problem: Part 2
Jochen E. Führing writes: I just rechecked the alias Problem: /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains says stange.net:stange-stangenet But even if I setup ~stange/.qmail-stangenet-default I get this error: qmail-send will not re-read virtualdomains until you send it a SIGHUP or shut it down and restart it. Did you do one of these? paul
Re: .qmail file does not work (this is right one ,first i made some mistake in it)
asantos writes: Second, I'm not very familiar with egrep's regular expressions, but if I was to parenthise what you wrote it would seem to me that egrep would read it as (word(1|w)ord(2|w)ord3) No, concatenation takes precedence over selection (i.e., `|') in regular expressions. paul
Re: dual smtpd
Ihnen, David writes: I want to accept email either A. from a set of defined IP addresses or B. to a set of defined domains See URL:http://web.infoave.net/~dsill/lwq.html#relaying or URL:http://www.palomine.net/qmail/selectiverelay.html. You'll set it up so that tcpserver allows all connections, and for some of them, sets the RELAYCLIENT environment variable, which signifies that qmail-smtpd should ignore rcpthosts. paul
Re: qmail install problem
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Now, where is the mailbox I am supposed to look in? I use pine, and even tried mutt, but no messages in either. I think I remember seeing something on making some cahnges in these to to make work with qmail. The instructions you're looking for are in INSTALL.mbox. paul
Re: vpopmail+qmail+maildir
Jussi Salokangas writes: I have about 200 users on system. Everyone has a file called 'Mailbox' and I would like to change 'Maildir' so I could use qmail pop-3. Is this possible with some script, that root could change them to Maildir? There may be something useful at URL:http://www.qmail.org/top.html#maildir. paul
Re: want to leave
John van V. writes: I'm not sure who is moderating, but maybe a message at the bottom w/ the escape clause... This list isn't moderated, and AFAIK, the list owner doesn't read it. paul
RE: deferral: Unable_to_switch_to_/home/mailhome/s/simonyjh:_access_denied._(#4.3.0)/
Chris Tolley writes: sed s/\:1001\:/\:new_GUD\: assign.timestamp assign.whatever ... Just in case you didn't know, you use \ to "escape" the character so that the command line doesn't try to interpret it. The : means "null" and is used in shell scripting for "doing nothing" You don't need to escape these colons. `:' is a builtin command, but it's not a special character; as far as command *parsing* goes, `:' is just like `b'. paul
Re: Home Windows/linux network mail system - please help
Ondrej Sury writes: Bruno Prior wrote: (d) How important is it that I use maildir rather than mbox format? All the info on the qmail sites seems to imply that it's very important, but is maildir really necessary for my meager needs? And would it be more complicated to use than mbox files? No, it is not important. You have to use Maildir format only if you want to use qmail-pop3d. Or if you care about reliability. If a process dies while delivering a message to an mbox, the mbox becomes corrupted. Maildir is not corruptible, if used correctly. Maildir also has no need for file locking. paul
Re: qmail install problem
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Test.recieve works to I enter data, and then I get 220 kerryb.basicq.com ESMTP helo dude 250 kerryb.basicq.com mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 ok data 503 RCPT first (#5.5.1) If I enter data, I get the following message. 502 unimplemented (#5.5.1) "503 RCPT first". You're not speaking SMTP correctly. You need to start with `MAIL FROM: sender@somewhere', then `RCPT TO: destination@somewhere', then DATA. Read RFC 821 for details. paul
Re: qsanity question
Tony Campisi writes: [root@# /var/qmail/bin]# ./qmail-qread [root@# /var/qmail/bin]# ./qmail-qsanity message has no entry in info: 50493 message is neither local nor remote: 50493 My question.. is there any way to look at this message and /or deliver it? As root (or qmailq), look at /var/qmail/queue/*/*/50493. paul
Re: var spool mail --- Maildir
Jochen E. Führing writes: We have a site running about 100 users and now we want to move to qmail.Howto convert all the /var/spool/mail/user messages into the Maidir Format ? See URL:http://www.qmail.org/top.html#maildir. paul
Re: Relaying once again...
Sylwester S. Biernacki writes: /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts here you define which machines you allow to be your relay clients. No, that file lists the destination hosts and domains that qmail accepts mail for via SMTP and QMTP. To allow certain senders to relay though you to any destination, use RELAYCLIENT. man tcprules, man qmail-smtpd. paul
Re: Help plz, How to delete messages??
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: there is more than 25000 mail left on our mail queque, how can i remove them (only for one spec. user), there is some important mail (from other users) among them. Wait a week, and qmail will give up on those messages. paul
Re: OT: can't unsubscribe
Mirko Koenig writes: i worte at least two messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] but i recieve messages again and again. how can i unsubscribe the list? Look for Return-Path: in the header of the messages you get from the list. Mine looks like this: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] You'll see qmail-return-number-, followed by the address you used to subscribe to the list. Let's refer to this address as `user@host'. (It will appear as `user=host' in the Return-Path.) Now send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and then follow the directions in the response message. If you send only the first message, nothing will happen; you need to send a second message, as will be explained in the response to the first message. paul
Re: OT: can't unsubscribe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Acknowledgment: The address [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not on this mailing list. This is telling you that [EMAIL PROTECTED] wasn't subscribed to begin with. (The text would be different if ezmlm had removed the address from the list.) Apparently, you're subscribed with a different address, which is probably then forwarding to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To find the address that you're subscribed with, look for Return-Path: in the header of this message. paul
Re: supervise lock problem on startup/install
J!M writes: [root@samurai /root]# /var/qmail/rc: default: command not found What does your /var/qmail/rc look like? paul
Re: .qmail
Eddie Greer writes: The problem is when I telnet to localhost 25 and follow the direction from the TEST.deliver, I connect to the port and run all the commands but the mail does not get delivered. I took a look at the log and it states the following: deferral: uh-oh:_first_line_of_.qmail_file_is blank._(#4.2.1)/ It's pretty self-explanatory - the first line of your .qmail file is blank, and it's not allowed to be. "But", you may say, "I don't have a .qmail file." In that case, I'd say your default delivery is blank, which amounts to the same problem in a different place. What does your /var/qmail/rc look like? What's the first argument to qmail-start? It probably ought to be ./Mailbox, or ./Maildir/, or |procmail - it's up to you, but it can't be blank. (It can be #, if you want to silently drop mail by default.) paul
Re: qmail-start
Dennis Robertson writes:
Paul Jarc wrote:
/var/qmail/rc should be run as part of *system* startup, not user
login.
Thanks. I'm going to uninstall qmail and try again. Where should
the command be?
You probably don't need to reinstall. Just remove that command from
your .bashrc, and add it to your system startup scripts. The details
of this will vary depending on how your system is set up. On my
RedHat 6 box, I have /etc/rc.d/rc[235].d/S40qmail symlinked to
../init.d/qmail, which contains:
#!/bin/sh
case "$1" in
start)
echo -n "Starting qmail: "
/var/qmail/rc
echo
touch /var/lock/subsys/qmail
;;
stop)
echo -n "Stopping qmail: "
killall qmail-send
echo
rm -f /var/lock/subsys/qmail
;;
restart|reload)
killall -HUP qmail-send
;;
*)
echo "Usage: $0 {start|stop|restart|reload}"
exit 1
esac
exit 0
paul
Re: qmail and dial-on-demand
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The other question that arises is that I'd quite like qmail *not* to accept SMTP mail from the outside world (my ISP delivers using SMTP but want it to continue to accept SMTP mail from other computers on my home LAN. How can I do this? man tcprules. If you have your own block of IP addresses for your home net, you could use somthing like: a.b.c.:allow :deny Otherwise: a0.b0.c0.d0:allow a1.b1.c1.d1:allow ... one for each address in your network :deny paul
Re: spam and well known smtp servers
Cerberus - the Guardian of Hades writes: i need to unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] from this list as he is no longer a user at this server. please help. 0. Arrange for mail to those addresses to be delivered somewhere where you can get to it. 1. Send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], and [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2. Follow the directions given in the responses. (The responses will go to the addresses you're trying to unsubscribe, which is why you need to redirect his mail first.) paul
Re: qmail-start
Dennis Robertson writes: Firstly as user when I open a term I get the message: env: qmail-start: Permission denied. I have followed both LWQ and the how-to and have checked permissions without finding what is wrong. Secondly, when I open a term I get a number like [1] 27087 in the top left corner, caused by the csh -cf '/var/qmail/rc ' script I added to .bashrc as per the install notes para 14. These are two symptoms of the same problem. /var/qmail/rc should be run as part of *system* startup, not user login. Normal users don't have execute permission for qmail-start, thus your first symptom. The second is simply what bash does when it starts a job in the background: it prints the job number and PID. You can suppress this by starting the job from a subshell: $ (foo) But in this case, the command shouldn't be in your .bashrc at all. paul
Re: rejecting subscribe/unsubscribe requests
Hand, Brian C. writes: How does one setup qmail and ezmlm to allow subscribes and unsubscribes to be done ONLY by command line. If you remove listdir/public, ezmlm-manage will stop responding to all administrative requests, including -subscribe, -unsubscribe, and -get. If you want -get to keep working, you can intercept delivery of the subscription messages. The foo-subscribe and foo-unsubscribe addresses are handled by the list's .qmail-default file - you can create .qmail-[un]subscribe[-default] files to handle any messages sent to those addresses. bouncesaying ought to be useful. If instead you want to drop these messages silently, remember that the .qmail files shouldn't be empty (that indicates that the system's default delivery method should be used - ./Mailbox, or whatever), and the first line can't be blank - `#' is the smallest no-op. I apologize if this is documented somewhere but I only found out how to prevent posts to the mailing lists itself. Hm - how do you do that? paul
Re: does qmail+ezmlm divid subscribers in chunks by domain?
??? writes: Then I send a message to the mailling list, does qmail+ezmlm 1.Send ONE message to "remote.host". And let the MTA of "remote.host" deliver the message to these 26 accounts? or 2.Send 26 message to "remote.host"? 2. Sending separate messages means bounces are handled much more easily, among other things. paul
RE: smtpd/run
Eddie Greer writes: softlimit: fatal: unable to run : file does not exist ... Here is a copy of my /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-stmpd/run file #!/bin/sh QMAILDUID=`/usr/xpg4/bin/id -u =qmaild` NOFILESGID=`/usr/xpg4/bin/id -g =qmaild` Those `='s aren't suppoesd to be there, are they? exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 200 \ /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -p -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb \ -u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 21 Make sure that there's no whitespace after the \ at the end of the line. Or removes the backslashes and put the whole command on one line. paul
Re: tcprules, rcpthost, ip address problem
Barry Dwyer writes: If I create a rcpthosts file with just the local domain in it (that's all I want), then every local client that tries to send mail out to the 'net gets a qmail error message saying the destination domain is not in the list of receipt hosts (or something to that effect). Does rcpthosts contain `.domain.tld', or just `domain.tld'? If the latter, it will accept messages only from that host. Use the former to accept messages from all hosts in that domain. paul
conditional forward jump in .qmail
Closing the gap slightly between qmail-local and procmail... I've
implemented a flow control feature in qmail-local for .qmail files.
If you have a sequence of lines like:
?label command arg ...
...
:label
it'll deliver the message to the command, and if the command exits
with status 99, qmail-local will skip down to the `:label' line -
delivery instructions in the intervening lines are ignored. `:' lines
are otherwise treated as comments. A label is a (possibly empty)
sequence of non-space, non-tab, nonzero bytes. Text following a label
on a `:' line is ignored. If there is no command, it's an
unconditional jump. If a command exits 99 and the corresponding label
is not found, all following delivery instructions are skipped (as with
`|command'). There are no backward jumps. This makes the .qmail
language a little more useful, IMO, but not enough to cause
trouble. :) (You get if-then-else, but not while.) The syntax is a
little ugly, but it gets the job done.
The same functionality is already available with `|' command lines,
but then you need multiple .qmail files, which exposes extra addresses
to outside senders, so it gets a little more complicated.
Does anyone know:
- whether this has already been done?
- whether this is already in the works for qmail proper?
- whether this would be likely to be accepted into qmail proper?
(Does DJB read this list?)
If you use it, let me know if it breaks, so I can fix it, or if it
works, so I'll have a feeling of accomplishment. (It's passed my
tests.)
Also, while writing this I noticed what appears to be a bug:
qmail-local trims trailing whitespace from a delivery instruction
before processing it. This breaks instructions like `|command foo\ '.
The fix, I guess, would be to do the trimming only for lines beginning
with other than `|' (and `?', and, as long as we're special-casing,
`#', to save a few cycles). mbox files could have names ending in
spaces, too, but if whitespace were left at the end of `.' and `/'
lines, then `./foo/ ' would be reinterpreted as an mbox instead of a
maildir, as it is now, so that might not be a good idea.
Here's the diff -u:
8
--- qmail-local.c Sat Jun 17 05:02:16 2000
+++ qmail-local.c~ Mon Jun 15 05:53:16 1998
@@ -653,7 +653,6 @@
if (i) break;
strerr_die1x(111,"Uh-oh: first line of .qmail file is blank. (#4.2.1)");
case '#':
- case ':':
break;
case '.':
case '/':
@@ -671,46 +670,6 @@
if (flagforwardonly) strerr_die1x(111,"Uh-oh: .qmail has prog delivery but
has x bit set. (#4.7.0)");
if (flagdoit) mailprogram(cmds.s + i + 1);
else sayit("program ",cmds.s + i + 1,k - i - 1);
- break;
- case '?':
- ++i;
- {
- int l;
- for (l = i;l k;++l)
- if (cmds.s[l] == ' ' || cmds.s[l] == '\t') {
- cmds.s[l] = 0;
- for (++l;l k;++l)
- if (cmds.s[l] != ' ' cmds.s[l] != '\t') {
- ++count_program;
- if (flagforwardonly) strerr_die1x(111,"Uh-oh: .qmail has prog
delivery but has x bit set. (#4.7.0)");
- if (flagdoit) mailprogram(cmds.s + l);
- else sayit("program ",cmds.s + l,k - l);
- break;
- }
- break;
- }
- if (l == k || flag99) {
- flag99 = 0;
- cmds.s[j] = '\n';
- for (;j + 1 cmds.len;++j)
- if (cmds.s[j] == '\n' cmds.s[j + 1] == ':') {
- j += 2;
- l = j;
- for (; j cmds.len;++j) {
- if (cmds.s[j] == 0) break;
- if (cmds.s[j] == '\t') break;
- if (cmds.s[j] == '\n') break;
- if (cmds.s[j] == ' ') break;
- }
- if (!str_diffn(cmds.s + i,cmds.s + l,j - l)) {
- for (; j cmds.len;++j)
- if (cmds.s[j] == '\n') break;
- break;
- }
- --j;
- }
- }
- }
break;
case '+':
if (str_equal(cmds.s + i + 1,"list"))
8
paul
