Re: Qmailqueue patch over current qmail 1.03
You are correct. If you don't use it then it costs you nothing. -- Paul Farber Farber Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545 On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Charles Cazabon wrote: > Paul Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > qmail-queue will slow down mail processing (did in my case) so if its a > > medium/high volume smtp server then you better plan for some additional > > bogomips to fire off the scanning. > > Note that the QMAILQUEUE patch alone should not increase server load by > any measurable amount; it's whatever you run using QMAILQUEUE (i.e. a > virus scanner or other mail filter) which sucks CPU cycles and memory. > > Charles >
Re: Qmailqueue patch over current qmail 1.03
Paul Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > qmail-queue will slow down mail processing (did in my case) so if its a > medium/high volume smtp server then you better plan for some additional > bogomips to fire off the scanning. Note that the QMAILQUEUE patch alone should not increase server load by any measurable amount; it's whatever you run using QMAILQUEUE (i.e. a virus scanner or other mail filter) which sucks CPU cycles and memory. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ ---
Re: Qmailqueue patch over current qmail 1.03
No, I did. the qmail-queue patch only mods 2 files and the config for it is also by itself. qmail-queue will slow down mail processing (did in my case) so if its a medium/high volume smtp server then you better plan for some additional bogomips to fire off the scanning. -- Paul Farber Farber Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545 On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, board master wrote: > Hi, > > I've already installed: > > Qmail 1.03+Vpopmail 4.10+sqwebmail+daemontools+ezmlm+autoresond+ucspi > (PHWEW!) > > and I was wondering what would happen if I patched a brand new qmail 1.03 > with the qmailqueue patch (I want to use virus scanning) and installed the > patched qmail over itself. Would I lose anything? Files, configurations, > etc? > > Thanks in advance, > Michael > > _ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > >
Re: Qmailqueue patch over current qmail 1.03
board master <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've already installed: > > Qmail 1.03+Vpopmail 4.10+sqwebmail+daemontools+ezmlm+autoresond+ucspi > (PHWEW!) > > and I was wondering what would happen if I patched a brand new qmail 1.03 > with the qmailqueue patch (I want to use virus scanning) and installed the > patched qmail over itself. You shouldn't have to use a "brand new qmail 1.03" -- none of the packages above require patching qmail, to my knowledge, so what you're running now is a pure vanilla qmail plus addons. > Would I lose anything? Files, configurations, etc? You shouldn't. Just cd to the qmail source directory where you previously compiled qmail. Then apply the QMAILQUEUE patch, and do "make setup check". Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ ---
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch for qmail-1.03
I vote to leave it alone. Let the configuring individual invoke
/bin/sh in QMAILQUEUE herself if she understands and still wants to
make that particular convenience vs. overhead tradeoff.
Valued at $0.02,
JS
On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 10:26:28PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote:
>
> I've been contemplating rewriting the patch to do an exec of
> { "/bin/sh", "-c", $QMAILQUEUE } instead of exec'ing $QMAILQUEUE as-is.
> This would allow for putting the contents of the script named by
> $QMAILQUEUE (which is frequently a one-line shell script anyways) into
> the variable itself. Are there any downsides to this approach other
> than the obvious overhead of adding /bin/sh to the execution path? Is
> this overhead significant enough to make such a modification a bad idea?
> --
> Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/ http://untroubled.org/
> OpenPGP key: 699980E8 / D0B7 C8DD 365D A395 29DA 2E2A E96F B2DC 6999 80E8
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch for qmail-1.03
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What kind of problems? Maybe when $QMAILQUEUE is constructed within a shell somewhere. You possibly would have doubled quoting. Hm. This case would be beyond the average user anyway so the one who does it should know what he/she is doing. Regards, Frank
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch for qmail-1.03
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 08:21:13AM +0200, Frank Tegtmeyer wrote: > Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > than the obvious overhead of adding /bin/sh to the execution path? Is > > this overhead significant enough to make such a modification a bad idea? > Are there quoting problems to expect? What kind of problems? The value of $QMAILQUEUE would be passed in to /bin/sh -c as-is, and /bin/sh would expand quotes, variables, etc. -- Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/ http://untroubled.org/ OpenPGP key: 699980E8 / D0B7 C8DD 365D A395 29DA 2E2A E96F B2DC 6999 80E8 PGP signature
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch for qmail-1.03
On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 10:26:28PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote:
> I've been contemplating rewriting the patch to do an exec of
> { "/bin/sh", "-c", $QMAILQUEUE } instead of exec'ing $QMAILQUEUE as-is.
> This would allow for putting the contents of the script named by
> $QMAILQUEUE (which is frequently a one-line shell script anyways) into
> the variable itself. Are there any downsides to this approach other
> than the obvious overhead of adding /bin/sh to the execution path? Is
> this overhead significant enough to make such a modification a bad idea?
Given that the same thing is currently done by writing a one-line shell
script, I really can't see the advantage given the extra overhead...
I've had several occassions with other products where I have the opposite
problem. They allow you to call "/bin/sh -c 'program arg1 arg2...'", and I
find it doesn't work as expected. So I end up writing one-line shell scripts
and call that instead :-)
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Unix/Special Projects, Trimble NZ
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch for qmail-1.03
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > than the obvious overhead of adding /bin/sh to the execution path? Is > this overhead significant enough to make such a modification a bad idea? Are there quoting problems to expect? If yes, I would leave the patch the way it is now. Regards, Frank
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch for qmail-1.03
On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 03:37:21PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote:
> Appended is a patch to qmail-1.03 that causes any program that would run
> qmail-queue to look for an environment variable QMAILQUEUE. If it is
> present, it is used in place of the string "bin/qmail-queue" when
> running qmail-queue.
I've been contemplating rewriting the patch to do an exec of
{ "/bin/sh", "-c", $QMAILQUEUE } instead of exec'ing $QMAILQUEUE as-is.
This would allow for putting the contents of the script named by
$QMAILQUEUE (which is frequently a one-line shell script anyways) into
the variable itself. Are there any downsides to this approach other
than the obvious overhead of adding /bin/sh to the execution path? Is
this overhead significant enough to make such a modification a bad idea?
--
Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/ http://untroubled.org/
OpenPGP key: 699980E8 / D0B7 C8DD 365D A395 29DA 2E2A E96F B2DC 6999 80E8
PGP signature
Re: qmailqueue patch
Joy Hundley writes: > How do I know/find out if my system has the qmailqueue patch that is > required to enable qmail to call a different qmail-queue program than the > one compiled in by default? Where would I find this information? strings /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd | grep QMAILQUEUE Or look at the source code. -- -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | John Hartford, RIP Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch error 4.5.1
Paul Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have softlimit -m 400 at the start of the qmail-smtpd script I seem to recall the others had to raise it to at least 6MB to get it to work. This should be in the archives in the last month; I believe the subject had something to do with Amavis, although probably with different case. Charles > > Paul Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > trying to implement the the qmail-qfilter patch and the only thing I've > > > been able to do is cause 4.5.1's all day (unable to exec qq). > > > > > > What's the trick? > > > > > > Searched the archives and nothing came close... ANY ideas??? > > > > There were several people running into this within the last few weeks; the > > trick there turned out to be raising the memory limits on qmail-smtpd > > IIRC -- Perl wouldn't fit into the current limits. See your smtpd > > start script/run script. -- --- Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch error 4.5.1
I have softlimit -m 400 at the start of the qmail-smtpd script Paul Farber Farber Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph 570-628-5303 Fax 570-628-5545 On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Charles Cazabon wrote: > Paul Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > trying to implement the the qmail-qfilter patch and the only thing I've > > been able to do is cause 4.5.1's all day (unable to exec qq). > > > > What's the trick? > > > > Searched the archives and nothing came close... ANY ideas??? > > There were several people running into this within the last few weeks; the > trick there turned out to be raising the memory limits on qmail-smtpd > IIRC -- Perl wouldn't fit into the current limits. See your smtpd > start script/run script. > > Charles > -- > --- > Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ > Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. > --- >
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch error 4.5.1
Paul Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > trying to implement the the qmail-qfilter patch and the only thing I've > been able to do is cause 4.5.1's all day (unable to exec qq). > > What's the trick? > > Searched the archives and nothing came close... ANY ideas??? There were several people running into this within the last few weeks; the trick there turned out to be raising the memory limits on qmail-smtpd IIRC -- Perl wouldn't fit into the current limits. See your smtpd start script/run script. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: qmailqueue-patch
Flavio Alberto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Como faço para aplicar este path? Babelfish gives the following translation: "How I make to apply this path?" If that's a reasonable translation, you want to download the qmail source, change into the top level-directory of it, and then execute patch -pX GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch - how to apply?
Hi, after sending my last message something happend and qmail stopped delivering local mail: Oct 25 02:02:33 be-01 qmail: 972439353.047394 starting delivery 258: msg 134477 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Oct 25 02:02:33 be-01 qmail: 972439353.047854 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 Oct 25 02:02:33 be-01 qmail: 972439353.072365 delivery 258: deferral: Unable_to_ find_alias_user!/ Oct 25 02:02:33 be-01 qmail: 972439353.072849 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 I rebuilt the whole system, now it works fine. I copied the deferred messages, fixed the queue, but they still do not deliver. I'm very confised - how can some messages get delivered and other not? and why they are not going to the postmaster? Postmaster is "catch all" user. And has this somethig with the patch? Milen
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch - how to apply?
Thank you all for the help. Unfortunetly after following the instructions in your mails qmail-scanner still don't want to compile - it says "can't find evidence of QMAILQUEUE patch in qmail-smtpd!". I can't figure where is the problem - in applying the patch or in compiling the scanner? Milen
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch - how to apply?
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 08:26:16AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: > I assume you're talking about Bruce Guenter's QMAILQUEUE patch, which can be > found at http://www.em.ca/~bruceg/qmail-qfilter/current/ . Actually, the QMAILQUEUE patch is at: http://em.ca/~bruceg/qmail+patches/sources/qmail-1.03-queuevar.patch The above is a program that can be used to take advantage of the patch. -- Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/ PGP signature
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch - how to apply?
Milen Petrinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am trying to install qmail-scanner, but it requires the QMAILQUEUE patch to > be installed. I followed the link on qmail.org, but I found a text that looks > like mail message with attachment. Can anybody answer how to download and > install the patch? I assume you're talking about Bruce Guenter's QMAILQUEUE patch, which can be found at http://www.em.ca/~bruceg/qmail-qfilter/current/ . A 'patch' is typically a set of changes for a known release of source code. You use a program called 'diff' to create a patchfile, and a program called 'patch' to apply them, hence the name. Read the manpage for 'patch' on your system, download the qmail source code, unpack it, and apply the patch. Then compile and (re-)install qmail. If these instructions are too terse, you are probably in over your head for the moment. You should probably stick to a vanilla qmail install until you have time to do some additional research on the topic. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch
Michael French <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 19 September 2000 at 23:33:44 -0400 > I was afraid of just "eyeballing it" and really screwing it up. No, I > don't know exactly what I am doing, I am LEARNING, that is why I asked for > help with a qmail related issue which is what I thought the purpose of this > list was. If you have problems answering a question politely, don't bother > saying anything at all. I realize this list can sometimes get repeative, > but I made the effort to search the list archives and nothing was said about > this except for a few unanswered requests for help. Someone even told me " > don't bother this mailing list" with this question. > I don't understand how a question pertaining to qmail (ie patching the > source) does not belong on this list and why replies to questions have to > terse or even down right rude. Don't get me wrong, people like Dave Sill > and Ken Grieve have been very helpful and patient but others of you only > gone out of your way to be rude. I am not trying to start a flame war a la > "linuxpeople", I am just asking for some common courtsey. I'd guess that many people here think that applying patches and merging patches are basic Unix sysadmin tasks that should be in your toolkit before you take on complex software like an MTA. They're general skills, not specific to qmail. -- David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 12:16:20PM +0200, J.J.Gallardo wrote: > > > I got the QMAILQUEUE patch the other day so I could get scan4virus working. > > When I tried running the patch on the qmail source, it failed out. Could this > > be because I used the DNS qmail patch? If so, should I > > Yes this is why it failed. > > Anybody knowns if there is a 'documented problem' if you have patched Qmail with > Spamcontrol 1.3.0 and you gonna patch later with scan4virus? It's the next step i > will do next days. Just try it and see :-) In general, patches will "live happily together" if each of them is small and only alters parts of the same file that aren't related. -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch
Jason Haar escribió: > > I got the QMAILQUEUE patch the other day so I could get scan4virus working. > When I tried running the patch on the qmail source, it failed out. Could this > be because I used the DNS qmail patch? If so, should I > Yes this is why it failed. Anybody knowns if there is a 'documented problem' if you have patched Qmail with Spamcontrol 1.3.0 and you gonna patch later with scan4virus? It's the next step i will do next days.
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch
I was afraid of just "eyeballing it" and really screwing it up. No, I don't know exactly what I am doing, I am LEARNING, that is why I asked for help with a qmail related issue which is what I thought the purpose of this list was. If you have problems answering a question politely, don't bother saying anything at all. I realize this list can sometimes get repeative, but I made the effort to search the list archives and nothing was said about this except for a few unanswered requests for help. Someone even told me " don't bother this mailing list" with this question. I don't understand how a question pertaining to qmail (ie patching the source) does not belong on this list and why replies to questions have to terse or even down right rude. Don't get me wrong, people like Dave Sill and Ken Grieve have been very helpful and patient but others of you only gone out of your way to be rude. I am not trying to start a flame war a la "linuxpeople", I am just asking for some common courtsey. Michael French Asheville Citizen-Times IT Dept. - Original Message - From: "Jason Haar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 6:06 PM Subject: Re: QMAILQUEUE patch On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 12:33:03PM -0400, French, Michael wrote: > I got the QMAILQUEUE patch the other day so I could get scan4virus > working. When I tried running the patch on the qmail source, it failed out. >... > Could this be because I used the DNS qmail patch? If so, should I Gaaa! Please remember such fundemental things next time! Yes this is why it failed. As is usually the case, patches are against UNTOUCHED sources. The qmailqueue patch needs to be against the original 1.03 sources, otherwise you _might_ get some failures, depending on what other patches you've already put on it. People who do this alot obviously have to know enough about what they're doing that they can work around such failures - usually you just eyeball it and work it out. -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch
how would you apply more than one patch then? wolfgang Also sprach Jason Haar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 20.09.2000: Yes this is why it failed. As is usually the case, patches are against UNTOUCHED sources.
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch
On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 12:33:03PM -0400, French, Michael wrote: > I got the QMAILQUEUE patch the other day so I could get scan4virus > working. When I tried running the patch on the qmail source, it failed out. >... > Could this be because I used the DNS qmail patch? If so, should I Gaaa! Please remember such fundemental things next time! Yes this is why it failed. As is usually the case, patches are against UNTOUCHED sources. The qmailqueue patch needs to be against the original 1.03 sources, otherwise you _might_ get some failures, depending on what other patches you've already put on it. People who do this alot obviously have to know enough about what they're doing that they can work around such failures - usually you just eyeball it and work it out. -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Network Specialist, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Re: QMAILQUEUE Patch & qmail-qfilter & 451 qq internal bug (#4.3.0)
For some added confusion I put the softlimit command in after the supervise and it didn't help it DEFINATELY looks to be some type of limit thing though because [root@ecamp /root]# telnet ecamp.net 25 Trying 168.100.187.53... Connected to ecamp.net. Escape character is '^]'. 220 ecamp.net ESMTP EHLO campchi.ecamp.net 250-ecamp.net 250-PIPELINING 250 8BITMIME MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 250 ok RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 250 ok DATA 354 go ahead Received: (qmail 14800 invoked by uid 507); 7 Jul 2000 10:16:20 - Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: "dorine.perach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 10:16:20 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit hi . 250 ok 963619908 qp 9102 QUIT 221 ecamp.net queues up great - but a longer email message doesn't if [ -e $CDB ]; then supervise $DIR \ /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 400 \ tcpserver $VERBOSE -c$CONCURRENT -x $CDB -u$USERID -g$GROUPID 0 $PORT \ sh -c ' /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd cd /var/qmail/autoturn maildirsmtp /var/qmail/autoturn/$TCPREMOTEIP autoturn-$TCPREMOTEIP- $TCPREMOTEIP AutoTURN ' \ 2>&1| setuser $LOGUSER accustamp \ | setuser $LOGUSER cyclog $LOGSIZE $LOGDIR & else . is the line i use to start it root 6725 0.0 0.0 1060 328 pts/39 S20:04 0:00 supervise /var/lock/qmail-smtpd /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 400 tcpserver -v -c40 -x /etc/tcprules.d/qmail-smtpd.cdb -u81 -g80 0 smtp sh -c ??? ?/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpdcd /var/qmail/autoturnmaildirsmtp /var/qmail/autoturn/$TCPREMOTEIP autoturn-$TCPREMOTEIP- $TCPREMOTEIP AutoTURN qmaill6727 0.0 0.0 1068 332 pts/39 S20:04 0:00 cyclog -s 100 /var/log/qmail-smtpd qmaild6728 0.0 0.0 1316 576 pts/39 S20:04 0:00 tcpserver -v -c40 -x /etc/tcprules.d/qmail-smtpd.cdb -u81 -g80 0 smtp sh -c ??? ?/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpdcd /var/qmail/autoturnmaildirsmtp /var/qmail/autoturn/$TCPREMOTEIP autoturn-$TCPREMOTEIP- $TCPREMOTEIP AutoTURN qmaild9228 0.0 0.0 1316 596 pts/39 S20:15 0:00 tcpserver -v -c40 -x /etc/tcprules.d/qmail-smtpd.cdb -u81 -g80 0 smtp sh -c ??? ?/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpdcd /var/qmail/autoturnmaildirsmtp /var/qmail/autoturn/$TCPREMOTEIP autoturn-$TCPREMOTEIP- $TCPREMOTEIP AutoTURN is the processes that are running Thanks, Eric > On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, Eric Peters wrote: > First off it probably doesn't have anything at all to do with QMAILQUEUE > > just laying the foundation down for the implementation > > this seems to only be happening on some hosts and I can't figure out what > the uniqueness is > > and the 451 qq internal bug doesn't tell me much when i look at the > qmail-smtpd.c file (where its found) > > > here is a session that causes the error > > [root@ecamp /root]# telnet ecamp.net 25 > Trying 168.100.187.53... > Connected to ecamp.net. Escape character is '^]'. > 220 ecamp.net ESMTP > EHLO campchi.ecamp.net > 250-ecamp.net > 250-PIPELINING > 250 8BITMIME > MAIL FROM:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 250 ok > RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 250 ok > DATA > 354 go ahead > Received: (qmail 14800 invoked by uid 507); 7 Jul 2000 10:16:20 - > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: "dorine.perach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 10:16:20 GMT > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Hi honey. I like having two messages in my e-mail box. I wrote out all > the checks for D'vrei Englit in Sept/Oct. and Elan never handed them in > of course we did figure that out... I hope she didn't think we were > trying to get away with something. What did you say to her? > > blah blahblahblah > > Love, Me Write right back! > . > 451 qq internal bug (#4.3.0) > > > AAACK! > > > I am lost > > here is the setup for the qmail shit > > the qmail-smtpd.cdb is populated based upon > > 168.100.206.150:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",QMAILQUEUE="/usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq" > > and > /usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq: > #!/bin/sh > exec /usr/local/bin/qmail-qfilter /usr/local/bin/log_sent > > (the log_sent is the program I have that logs the data n stuff) > > either way if i just have > > /usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq: > #!/bin/sh > exec /usr/local/bin/qmail-qfilter > > (no parameters) the same error occurs > > Any help would be a god blessing! > > Thanks for your time, > > Eric > >
Re: QMAILQUEUE Patch & qmail-qfilter & 451 qq internal bug (#4.3.0)
permissions are 755, only certain clients, 168.100.206.150:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",QMAILQUEUE="/usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq" and i have the pasted the contents of the qmail-filterq file already too the loggin works on some hosts that connect up via serialmail to relay its only some hosts that it has issues on - (the softmail thing does sound promising ---) Eric > > > Any other suggestions? > > You still haven't told us what your permissions are on the system on > which it is failing. Or does it only fail for certain clients? What > are the exact contents of your tcpcontrol rules file? > -- > Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/ >
Re: QMAILQUEUE Patch & qmail-qfilter & 451 qq internal bug (#4.3.0)
On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 07:51:34AM -0700, Eric Peters wrote: > I have made the qmail-filterq script (the one that immediately calls the > qmail-qfilter) so it doesn't actually pass onto anything (there isn't a > log_sent) and it still gives that error as of yet I havn't found where > there is a softlimit installed either as mentioned in a previous couple > replies Softlimit is part of the daemontools package. > Any other suggestions? You still haven't told us what your permissions are on the system on which it is failing. Or does it only fail for certain clients? What are the exact contents of your tcpcontrol rules file? -- Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/ PGP signature
Re: QMAILQUEUE Patch & qmail-qfilter & 451 qq internal bug (#4.3.0)
I have made the qmail-filterq script (the one that immediately calls the qmail-qfilter) so it doesn't actually pass onto anything (there isn't a log_sent) and it still gives that error as of yet I havn't found where there is a softlimit installed either as mentioned in a previous couple replies Any other suggestions? Eric On Fri, 14 Jul 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I had similar problems at one point. Turned out to be an error buried in > the script executed by qmail-qfilter. It only produced the error when it > hit a certain point in the script that only ran against messages coming > from a particular host. > > I found my problem by putting the problem message in a text file and piping > it into my filtering program (like your log_sent). I immedately saw the > script error on screen and was able to correct it. You may need to monkey > with some environment variables to duplicate the problem environment, > though. > > Josh > > > > > > Eric Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/14/2000 09:32:12 AM > > To: Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: QMAILQUEUE Patch & qmail-qfilter & 451 qq internal bug > (#4.3.0) > > > they are - as i said its sporadic in many ways - it works for some hosts > but not others (I have servers serial mailing' into this box) > > this host doesn't work though > > Eric > > On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, Bruce Guenter wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 07:13:29PM -0700, Eric Peters wrote: > > > First off it probably doesn't have anything at all to do with > QMAILQUEUE > > > just laying the foundation down for the implementation > > > > > > the qmail-smtpd.cdb is populated based upon > > > 168.100.206.150:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",QMAILQUEUE > ="/usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq" > > > > > > and > > > /usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq: > > > #!/bin/sh > > > exec /usr/local/bin/qmail-qfilter /usr/local/bin/log_sent > > > > What are the permissions on these files? Make sure they are both > > readable and executable by whatever user qmail-smtpd is running as. > > -- > > Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/ > > > > > >
Re: QMAILQUEUE Patch & qmail-qfilter & 451 qq internal bug (#4.3.0)
I had similar problems at one point. Turned out to be an error buried in the script executed by qmail-qfilter. It only produced the error when it hit a certain point in the script that only ran against messages coming from a particular host. I found my problem by putting the problem message in a text file and piping it into my filtering program (like your log_sent). I immedately saw the script error on screen and was able to correct it. You may need to monkey with some environment variables to duplicate the problem environment, though. Josh Eric Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/14/2000 09:32:12 AM To: Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: QMAILQUEUE Patch & qmail-qfilter & 451 qq internal bug (#4.3.0) they are - as i said its sporadic in many ways - it works for some hosts but not others (I have servers serial mailing' into this box) this host doesn't work though Eric On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, Bruce Guenter wrote: > On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 07:13:29PM -0700, Eric Peters wrote: > > First off it probably doesn't have anything at all to do with QMAILQUEUE > > just laying the foundation down for the implementation > > > > the qmail-smtpd.cdb is populated based upon > > 168.100.206.150:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",QMAILQUEUE ="/usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq" > > > > and > > /usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq: > > #!/bin/sh > > exec /usr/local/bin/qmail-qfilter /usr/local/bin/log_sent > > What are the permissions on these files? Make sure they are both > readable and executable by whatever user qmail-smtpd is running as. > -- > Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/ > $RFC822.eml
Re: QMAILQUEUE Patch & qmail-qfilter & 451 qq internal bug (#4.3.0)
they are - as i said its sporadic in many ways - it works for some hosts but not others (I have servers serial mailing' into this box) this host doesn't work though Eric On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, Bruce Guenter wrote: > On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 07:13:29PM -0700, Eric Peters wrote: > > First off it probably doesn't have anything at all to do with QMAILQUEUE > > just laying the foundation down for the implementation > > > > the qmail-smtpd.cdb is populated based upon > > 168.100.206.150:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",QMAILQUEUE="/usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq" > > > > and > > /usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq: > > #!/bin/sh > > exec /usr/local/bin/qmail-qfilter /usr/local/bin/log_sent > > What are the permissions on these files? Make sure they are both > readable and executable by whatever user qmail-smtpd is running as. > -- > Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/ >
Re: QMAILQUEUE Patch & qmail-qfilter & 451 qq internal bug (#4.3.0)
On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 07:13:29PM -0700, Eric Peters wrote: > First off it probably doesn't have anything at all to do with QMAILQUEUE > just laying the foundation down for the implementation > > the qmail-smtpd.cdb is populated based upon > 168.100.206.150:allow,RELAYCLIENT="",QMAILQUEUE="/usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq" > > and > /usr/local/bin/qmail-filterq: > #!/bin/sh > exec /usr/local/bin/qmail-qfilter /usr/local/bin/log_sent What are the permissions on these files? Make sure they are both readable and executable by whatever user qmail-smtpd is running as. -- Bruce Guenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://em.ca/~bruceg/ PGP signature
Re: qmailqueue patch?
At 15:38 06/04/2000 +, Jennifer Tippens wrote: >Hello, >I'm having difficulty with the qmailqueue patch >(http://www.qmail.org/qmailqueue-patch) I'm not sure if I'm doing it >correctly, as I have not had to patch anything before. I copied the patch >part of the text to a file on my box and called it qmailqueue-patch and put >it into a newly untarred qmail-1.03 source. Then I just did: patch > >patching file `Makefile' >Hunk #1 FAILED at 1483. >1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to Makefile.rej then do vi qmailqueue-patch and see the line 1483. usually the problem is like this the end of a line is ;} but the } go to the second line and make the line only contain ; you should move the } to the correct line (it is the upper line of its now) --- AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
Re: qmailqueue patch?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I'm having difficulty with the qmailqueue patch >(http://www.qmail.org/qmailqueue-patch) I'm not sure if I'm doing it >correctly, as I have not had to patch anything before. I copied the >patch part of the text to a file on my box and called it >qmailqueue-patch and put it into a newly untarred qmail-1.03 source. >Then I just did: patch >patching file `Makefile' >Hunk #1 FAILED at 1483. >1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to Makefile.rej >patching file `qmail.c' > >And so, the make fails, of course. >What am I doing wrong? Maybe nothing. If you've installed any other patches that changed Makefile, patch might not be able to figure out how to apply this patch. Look at Makefile.rej and see if you can figure out how to make the changes manually. Did the patch to qmail.c succeed? -Dave
Re: QMAILQUEUE Patch for qmail-1.03
On Sun, 16 Jan 2000 18:16:40 -0500 , Juan E Suris writes: > I am interested in implementing this patch, but I am not sure how to do it. > I am thinking of writing a wrapper around qmail-queue that reads the message > and envelope, does all the necessary changes and forwards it to qmail-queue. > What I don't know how to do is how to setup my wrapper to talk to > qmail-queue after exec'ing it. Well, you could start by using the qmail_open/qmail_put/qmail_from/qmail_to/qmail_close interface like a normal qmail-queue client. The only thing that this leaves out is the return code from qmail-queue, which you probably want to pass on to your caller. I would suggest making "exitcode" in qmail_close (qmail.c) an external variable, so you can access it from another module. I'm in the progress of doing this myself -- just need more time :-/ -- Chris Mikkelson | If you throw your bread upon the waters, it shall come [EMAIL PROTECTED] | back threefold, but only if you are willing to throw the | recipe upon the waters as well... -- Terry Lambert
