Re: [CentOS] Postfix restrictions

2020-06-08 Thread Steven Tardy
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:10 AM Peter wrote: > On 9/06/20 2:56 pm, Jon LaBadie wrote: > > Don't use a backup MX, they are a relic of the 90s when mail servers > were often times not always online. a sending mail server will > generally retry the message for up to five days if your MTA is down

Re: [CentOS] Postfix restrictions

2020-06-08 Thread Peter
On 9/06/20 2:56 pm, Jon LaBadie wrote: I hit another limitation. My backup MX handler is a 3rd party who will not use greylisting. Thus all the 1st timers I rejected just delivered to my alternate MX address and were not blocked at all. Don't use a backup MX, they are a relic of the 90s when

Re: [CentOS] Postfix restrictions

2020-06-08 Thread John Pierce
yeah, then don't use a backup MX server at all. I dropped using one when I realized most spam prevention would just end up at the backup which didn't have the same rules as long as your server has a decent uptime and is never down more than a few hours and that very rarely, then you really don't

Re: [CentOS] Postfix restrictions

2020-06-08 Thread Jon LaBadie
On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 05:53:28AM -0700, John Pierce wrote: > On Sun, Jun 7, 2020, 2:47 AM Nicolas Kovacs wrote: > > > > > My aim is simply to eliminate as much spam as possible (that is, before > > adding > > SpamAssassin) while keeping false positives to a minimum. > > > > The one thing

Re: [CentOS] Trying to get bride network on CentOS 7 working with virt-manager

2020-06-08 Thread Gordon Messmer
On 6/8/20 3:46 PM, Jerry Geis wrote: I have these interfaces listed. virbr0: flags=4099 mtu 1500 inet 192.168.122.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.122.255 virbr1: flags=4099 mtu 1500 inet 192.168.100.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.100.255 Those

[CentOS] Trying to get bride network on CentOS 7 working with virt-manager

2020-06-08 Thread Jerry Geis
I have these interfaces listed. eth0: flags=4163 mtu 1500 inet 192.168.1.8 netmask 255.255.252.0 broadcast 192.168.3.255 inet6 fe80::e2d5:5eff:fe63:abe5 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20 ether e0:d5:5e:63:ab:e5 txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet) RX packets 42411243 bytes

Re: [CentOS] yum/dnf diff

2020-06-08 Thread Paddy Doyle
On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 04:00:31PM +0100, Paddy Doyle wrote: > Just to mention that 'etckeeper' from EPEL is a great way of tracking Ah, I see you mentioned you were using that already in the original post. Sorry for the noise. Paddy ___ CentOS

Re: [CentOS] yum/dnf diff

2020-06-08 Thread Paddy Doyle
On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 12:34:07PM -0700, Kenneth Porter wrote: > I'm trying to figure out > what edits I made to my config files. > > My most recent case was trying to figure out what I'd done to my BIND files > (/etc/named.*, /etc/logrotate.d/named, /var/named/*). I ended up just > tarring

Re: [CentOS] yum/dnf diff

2020-06-08 Thread Johnny Hughes
On 6/5/20 4:31 PM, Kenneth Porter wrote: > --On Friday, June 05, 2020 1:39 PM -0700 John Pierce > wrote: > >> don't most packages create a .rpmnew file if you've modified the previous >> package file ? > > That file is created AFTER you've made edits, and reflects only the > state of the file

[CentOS] C8 install problems

2020-06-08 Thread ejm
Hi all, I am trying to install C8 from a DVD I made onto a 1Tb disc partitioned into 2 ext4 partitions. The first partition contains C7 which I installed via a DVD. Trying to install C8 yields an error indicating the file /dev/root is missing. I've checked the SHA256 sum for the ISO for