ysql_*" are
DBD::mysql driver specific and so DBD::MariaDB cannot provide them. It
has to use "mariadb_*" prefix. So if application uses driver specific
mysql_* options they have to be renamed.
...
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
uld be any
different.
We are doing just that here with no other changes, zero issues on dozens
of administrative scripts that use it (including users/host management).
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
On 30/03/2024 11:42, Indunil Jayasooriya wrote:
Is is safe to replace DBD::MySQL with DBD::MariaDB ?
I am.using it in production on Alma Linux 9.
also on...
slackware 15.0
slackware -current
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
be enjoying family company and not those of
lists (this is a lists-only email & not "personal" addy)/forums/irc/nor
usenet for next four weeks unless that damn cyclone interferes with my
plans :)
Happy Holidays
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
On 28/11/2023 19:45, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 21.11.23 12:06, Noel Butler wrote: But they are inter-twined, DMARC
just does what DKIM and SPF declare, so any perceived DMARC issues *do*
include DKIM and SPF
but this is irelevant here.
We will have to agree to disagree
Not "a
On 21/11/2023 20:08, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 21.11.23 12:06, Noel Butler wrote:
This also depends on how you set DKIM's canonicalization
this is a (known) problem of DKIM and playing with DMARC will not solve
it.
Anyone using simple/simple should have a DKIM fail and plent
makes sense to report missing/unaligned DKIM.
Then set fo=d :)
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged
information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to
copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate
On 15/11/2023 13:59, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 11/14/23 22:03, Noel Butler wrote: I would understand if those
reports were required for DKIM fail or SPF fail, but missing aligned
SPF pass is something common with mailing lists.
You only get them on failures not every message, and no, not all
gards,
Noel Butler
This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged
information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to
copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate
this message without the authors express written authority to do so.
On 12/11/2023 14:04, Noel Butler wrote:
My understanding of the "fo" option is that it is only used for
reporting. i.e. It doesn't control whether the received email is
accepted or not, which is always based on _either_ SPF or DKIM checks
passing.
From RFC 7489:
fo: Fa
On 12/11/2023 13:03, Nick Tait wrote:
On 12/11/23 15:10, Noel Butler wrote:
DMARC (thus OpenDMARC) makes its decision based on the senders DMARC
fo policy -
if policy uses fo=0 then yes, both SPF and DKIM must exist, and both
must pass.
if policy uses fo=1 then no, as a minimum
ovt/corp email for private use so if ill-configured mailing lists for
example rejected them, then that's acceptable collateral damage.
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged
information, therefore at all times remains confidential an
27;s correct, if you're using only opendmarc just the
inet:127.0.0.1:54321 is needed, thats all you need, are you sure it is
adding sigs on sending? send an email to check-a...@verifier.port25.com
wait a minute then check its results email.
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
This Email, including att
On 11/11/2023 18:07, Damian wrote:
Also, since they allude to "some passing", I guess they did remember
to set enable_dkim_verification=1 ?
"Some passing OpenDMARC" might mean that they pass SPF-based only.
true if using fo=1
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
This Email, includ
responses are you seeing
for them?
You also dont need to setup amavisd as a milter if its working fine
already.
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged
information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to
copyright prote
rectly, try NANOG there are a few
MS guys I know on there, or if no response there used to be a MS guy on
the mailop list, no idea if he's still there, that list is run by self
important power tripping dictators so it should be a last resort port of
call if your desperate, if it was google I c
day, so my ESP link can't
connect ;)
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged
information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to
copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate
this message witho
asn't been updated in years is not necessarily a
sign of " time to find something else "...
I've seen no problems with mail from MS, so how about you elaborate on
your problems and what version of OD are you using?
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
This Email, including attachm
On 26/04/2023 16:55, Damian wrote:
Fedora 38 ships Amavis 2.13.0 which switched to clamdscan in Amavis
upstream.
We have a winner... Did the package manager explain/release_note why
they made that move?
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
This Email, including attachments, may contain legally
rchive)(.*) FOUND$/m ],
in debian, you must add clamav to amavis group, so clamd is able to
read mails unpacked by amavis.
perhaps redhat-based systems have similar requirement.
Perhaps, might explain it too. I haven't touched a rpm (or deb) system
in a very long time (we use slackware) so
On 26/04/2023 09:53, Benny Pedersen wrote:
clamdscan why ?, load of all signatures pr email scanned is slow very
slow :)
clamscan is slow
clamdscan is the client for clamd and is fast, that would be why he is
using it.
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
This Email, including attachments, may
Hi all,
Be aware got this notice, confirmed, that f-prot is EOL as of July 31
this year, there will be no more updated definitions, no more nothing.
Time to start looking at suitable alternatives folks.
--
Regards,
Noel Butler
This Email, including attachments, may contain legally
nd a copy of
> it to a dedicated address?
>
> That would be like quarantine to an email address but with reject status to
> the smtp client.
Not sure on this part if you run it via a milter, I'd assume not though
unless you modified the milter code
--
Kind Regards,
On 16/09/2016 19:38, Dino Edwards wrote:
Did something change in the mailing list? I'm not getting my replies
or my posts back. I can see they are showing up in the archives but
the mailing list is not redistributing back to me. I hope this is not
related to some ridiculous mailman config about r
On 15/09/2016 19:05, @lbutlr wrote:
I sent a message to the list yesterday (15:59 -0600) and it has not
shown up, nor have I gotten any sort of notification that it was not
posted or was rejected for some reason.
From: "@lbutlr"
Message-Id: <790f91a5-e300-4283-902a-3bb1ee806...@kreme.com>
Da
On 04/05/2016 09:30, Patrick Domack wrote:
Quoting Noel Butler :
On 03/05/2016 18:02, Frédéric Goudal wrote:
Le 30 avr. 2016 à 04:02, Noel Butler a
écrit :
On 30/04/2016 01:40, Frédéric Goudal wrote:
Hello,
I have searched for some time and have not found a solution for the
following
On 03/05/2016 18:02, Frédéric Goudal wrote:
Le 30 avr. 2016 à 04:02, Noel Butler a écrit
:
On 30/04/2016 01:40, Frédéric Goudal wrote:
Hello,
I have searched for some time and have not found a solution for the
following problem :
- we do have a correct spf record for our domain
- I would
On 02/05/2016 16:58, Christian Rößner wrote:
Am 02.05.2016 um 04:43 schrieb Noel Butler :
Dear mister smartfuck
Please unsubscribe this user from this mailing list.
Thanks
Christian
—
Christian Rößner B.Sc.
Erlenwiese 14, 36304 Alsfeld
T: +49 6631 78823400, F: +49 6631 78823409, M: +49 171
On 01/05/2016 22:09, Phil Regnauld wrote:
So, you've:
- used amavisd-new for years
- you've identified the problem (I assume you've sent patches to fix
the issue)
And, years later, you are still complaining about the issue, you
haven't
remedied the problem in you
On 29/04/2016 18:24, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
On 28.04.2016 03:42, @lbutlr wrote:
Is there a way to validate the recipient address before bothering
with
the content of the mail?
Yes, have postfix check for valid users first before passing the
message to amavis.
That is indeed my intention
On 30/04/2016 01:40, Frédéric Goudal wrote:
Hello,
I have searched for some time and have not found a solution for the
following problem :
- we do have a correct spf record for our domain
- I would like to reject mail pretending to come from our domain
Is there any way to do that with amavis ?
On 29/04/2016 20:48, Benedict White wrote:
Benedict may not be a dev but who's to say that he hasn't solved this
exact issue himself and is holding the secret that you desire?
I've been running Amavis for years, including re installing it several
times.
I have seen similar errors. They re
On 29/04/2016 20:00, Benedict White wrote:
A release 2.11.0 of amavisd-new now is available at:
https://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/amavisd-...
Release notes are at: [...]
(!!)TROUBLE in child_init_hook: BDB can't connect db env. at
/var/amavis/db: No such file or directory, No such file o
On 27/04/2016 05:46, Mark Martinec wrote:
A release 2.11.0 of amavisd-new now is available at:
https://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/amavisd-...
Release notes are at: [...]
(!!)TROUBLE in child_init_hook: BDB can't connect db env. at
/var/amavis/db: No such file or directory, No such file o
Hi Mark,
"
- remove a stale database file __db.nanny.db on a reload or restart,
as it can prevent a successful start when a previous start failed
for some reason; a patch by Trent Lloyd;
"
Does this patch fix the constant logfile-filling logging of no db found,
by just creating the damn th
What is "dnf" ?
What OS/flavor?
What was updated today?
What does maillog show when trying to start amavisd?
Multiple versions of perl?
Try running amavisd binary 'strace -f -o/tmp/ amavisd start ' then
review /tmp/
and see if it gives more clues.
On 15/03/2016 19:40, Stephen D
On 11/02/2016 21:17, Roland Schmid wrote:
Try increase
$log_level = 0; to 5 and see maillog
I'd check permissions, and try running from root account
amavisd runs with user _amavisd
amavis daemon was disabled in
/Applications/Server.app/Contents/ServerRoot/System/Library/LaunchDaemons/org.a
On 10/02/2016 21:43, Roland Schmid wrote:
Hallo,
der Amavis Daemon läuft nicht auf unserem OSX-Server.
sudo /Applications/Server.app/Contents/ServerRoot/usr/bin/amavisd start
endet mit diesem Fehler:
The amavisd daemon is apparently not running, no PID file
/Library/Server/Mail/Data/scanner/amav
Yes, I agree, github would be perfect
On 26/01/2016 08:56, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 8:50 AM +1000 Noel Butler
wrote:
Yeah, a lot of people here have seem to have no luck, I think I
mentioned
twice about a problem with no answer (gave up asking a third time
8:19 AM +1000 Noel Butler
wrote:
you might want to CC Marc directly - he hasn't posted in here in a
very
log time, inn fact Oct 2014 is last time I think when he announced
that
version, strange, since he posts regularly on postfix list we know
he's
still alive and kickin.
He
you might want to CC Marc directly - he hasn't posted in here in a very
log time, inn fact Oct 2014 is last time I think when he announced that
version, strange, since he posts regularly on postfix list we know he's
still alive and kickin.
On 26/01/2016 04:48, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--
On 10/09/2015 21:54, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Noel Butler skrev den 2015-09-10 00:18:
Authentication-Results: mail.ausics.net (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amavis.org header.b=X7zvfneB;
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=zimbra.com header.b=T3e0NNFd
Authentication
On 10/09/2015 02:08, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
We have dkim signing, and my emails to the list seem to work?
Yup
Authentication-Results: mail.ausics.net (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amavis.org header.b=X7zvfneB;
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=zimbra.com header
On 09/09/2015 05:42, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
* Benny Pedersen :
Patrick Ben Koetter skrev den 2015-09-08 20:45:
>Authentication-Results: mail.sys4.de (amavisd-new); dkim=pass
>(1024-bit key)
>header.d=amavis.org header.b=SBMRAVBH; dkim=fail (1024-bit key)
>reason="fail (messa
On 30/11/2014 22:42, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2014, A. Schulze wrote:
> Benny Pedersen: Upgrade to sa 3.4 where this work, else wait for next rule
> update, this is a work in progress thats only gives error when not using sa
> 3.4 At least here I *have* 3.4 but got the same war
Hi,
Your post might be best in English, but if my translation is correct in
that you are asking for a way to release quarantines files, yes, see
amavis-release, if you can not find it in your distro package (I dont
use debian so no idea if they do install it for you) , it's in the
source package.
On Mon, 2013-01-21 at 20:04 +0100, Mark Schweizer wrote:
> "X-Google-DKIM-Signature:" header?
>
google breaking standards, yet again, by the looks of it.
Otherwise they might use that for internal use?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
47 matches
Mail list logo