Re: Qmail + Mailman
* Karsten W. Rohrbach (Wed, May 16, 2001 at 05:55:23PM +0200) why bother using mailman? try ezmlm, it works for a lot of real high volume mailing lists ;-) ezmlm is, in my opinion, the way to go if you want to have as little to do with your lists and lists users as possible after you've set up your lists. I really like VERP, it saves me lots of time needed to othervise trying to track down the address users are subscribed as. (or does mailman have some real features compared to exmlm-idx?) For some, the web interface of mailman would be the reason for installing it. If you happen to like web interfaces (many users do), you would have to look long to find something as good as the mailman web interface. I've tried both, and qmail has no problem at all with either of these mailing list managers. -- SSM - Stig Sandbeck Mathisen Trust the Computer, the Computer is your Friend
Re: problems retrieving email
* Eric LaLonde (Mon, Jan 24, 2000 at 02:20:39PM -0800) I will definately email my net admin, but if you have any idea why it would connect fine to port 21, and not 25, let me know. Sounds like there is a firewall in between. A polite firewall will often answer back with an ICMP message of some sort. Usually "admin prohibited filter" (or something) A rude one will just drop the packets, and be quiet about it. Another thing that strenghtens my suspicion is that the next IP address in the range shows the same. ssm@hastur: ssm $telnet daylightfading.org 25 Trying 169.233.15.76... telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: No route to host ssm@hastur: ssm $telnet 169.233.15.77 25 Trying 169.233.15.77... telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: No route to host ssm@hastur: ssm $telnet 169.233.15.77 22 Trying 169.233.15.77... telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused Ask you friendly network administrator. -- SSM - Stig Sandbeck Mathisen Trust the Computer, the Computer is your Friend
Re: The perennial Maildir question, perhaps with a new twist
* Steve Wolfe (Sat, Jan 22, 2000 at 02:12:04PM -0700)
both users have ~/Maildir, ~/Maildir/new, ~/Maildir/current, and
~/Maildir/tmp. All are 0700, and owned by {username}.users
What should I be looking for?
It should be:
# Make a maildir.
ssm@hastur: ssm $/var/qmail/bin/maildirmake Maildir
Check permissions
ssm@hastur: ssm $find Maildir/ -ls
2150901 drwx-- 5 ssm ssm 1024 Jan 22 23:56 Maildir/
2150991 drwx-- 2 ssm ssm 1024 Jan 22 23:56 Maildir/tmp
2151011 drwx-- 2 ssm ssm 1024 Jan 22 23:56 Maildir/new
2151021 drwx-- 2 ssm ssm 1024 Jan 22 23:56 Maildir/cur
And it is "cur", not "current".
--
SSM - Stig Sandbeck Mathisen
Trust the Computer, the Computer is your Friend
Re: Beware when patching Solaris machines
* Harald Hanche-Olsen (Thu, Oct 07, 1999 at 12:35:51AM +0200) Our sysadmin installed a bunch of patches on our Solaris machines today - basically, he just got a cluster of recommended patches and installed them all. Now, one or more of these patches "upgraded" /usr/lib/sendmail (was a symlink to /var/qmail/bin/sendmail, became a "real" sendmail). But not only that; the patch most helpfully installed the file /etc/rc2.d/S88sendmail for us. Came time to reboot the machine, and lo and behold, we now had a running sendmail daemon, which started rejecting all kinds of incoming mail. (It got to the smtp port before tcpserver+qmail-smtpd did.) To prevent sendmail from starting at boot, remove /etc/sendmail.cf, as the /etc/init.d/sendmail script exits if that does not exist. As Giles Lean mentioned: If you run Solaris with sonething else than Solaris stock sendmail installed, you need to check at every boot (and after every patch) that it hasn't "repaired" the sendmail installation. If you're feeling _really_ paranoid, make sure these commands are in the script used to start, stop, restart and reload qmail (if you use such a thing), and not only in a script run only at boot. (Not every Solaris patch package requires a reboot. You might be surprised one day. :-) -- SSM - Stig Sandbeck Mathisen Trust the Computer, the Computer is your Friend
