The updated Exim pages from the EPEL project for RHEL 7 & 8 (and related
distributions e.g. CentOS) as well as Fedora 34 are now in the process of
being pushed to the stable repositories and should be there in the next few
hours or so:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?packages=exim
Am 06.05.21 um 14:54 schrieb Konstantin Boyandin via Exim-users:
(yes, no problem building Exim package(s) for EPEL, once I understand
the exact way to to that)
fedpkg clone --anonymous exim
cd exim
git checkout epel8
# tweak exim.spec
fedpkg mockbuild
Felix
--
## List details at
Am 06.05.21 um 14:54 schrieb Konstantin Boyandin via Exim-users:
On 04.05.2021 20:40, Heiko Schlittermann via Exim-users wrote:
We have prepared a security release, tagged as "exim-4.94.2".
This release contains all changes on the exim-4.94+fixes branch plus
security fixes.
I wonder whether
Hello,
Setup: Exim (updated to the latest version) accepts mail for several
domains; for some of them it redirects messages to other (secondary)
Exim-driven mail servers, via manualroute.
Looks like not all these secondary Exim installations are up-to-date.
Question: are these secondary mail
On 06.05.2021 21:36, Tim Jackson via Exim-users wrote:
> On 06/05/2021 14:54, Konstantin Boyandin via Exim-users wrote:
>
>> The last known EPEL Exim version is 4.94 #2, built on March 25, 2021. It
>> wasn't difficult to build Exim from sources and replace insecure EPEL
>> version, but it's not
Am 06.05.21 um 14:14 schrieb Paul Muster via Exim-users:
Use fail2ban to detect these attempts in Exim's logfiles and ban the
source on IP basis.
Of course we do this too, but the point is, the logfile is written with
a delay. If you have 10 connections in parallel,
it would be easier if
On 06/05/2021 14:54, Konstantin Boyandin via Exim-users wrote:
The last known EPEL Exim version is 4.94 #2, built on March 25, 2021. It
wasn't difficult to build Exim from sources and replace insecure EPEL
version, but it's not exactly my understanding of fun.
An update was available for EPEL
On 06/05/2021 14:54, Konstantin Boyandin via Exim-users wrote:
> I wonder whether current Exim maintainer at EPEL reads this list.
It is already in epel-testing.
Greetings, Wolfgang
--
Wolfgang Breyha | https://www.blafasel.at/
Vienna University Computer Center | Austria
--
## List details at
Am 06.05.21 um 14:54 schrieb Konstantin Boyandin via Exim-users:
The last known EPEL Exim version is 4.94 #2, built on March 25, 2021. It
wasn't difficult to build Exim from sources and replace insecure EPEL
version, but it's not exactly my understanding of fun.
Exim updates are in
Am 06.05.21 um 15:35 schrieb Heiko Schlittermann via Exim-users:
(I got reports that Fedora's packages where stuck on some test server.
(?))
Updates are not "stuck" but in a testing repo. This is meant to check that we
only push actually working software to users. I'm not sure why the
Hi Konstantin,
Konstantin Boyandin via Exim-users (Do 06 Mai 2021
14:54:37 CEST):
> On 04.05.2021 20:40, Heiko Schlittermann via Exim-users wrote:
> > We have prepared a security release, tagged as "exim-4.94.2".
> >
> > This release contains all changes on the exim-4.94+fixes branch plus
> >
On 04.05.2021 20:40, Heiko Schlittermann via Exim-users wrote:
> We have prepared a security release, tagged as "exim-4.94.2".
>
> This release contains all changes on the exim-4.94+fixes branch plus
> security fixes.
I wonder whether current Exim maintainer at EPEL reads this list.
The last
On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 12:14:52PM +0200, Claus Assmann via Exim-users wrote:
> On Thu, May 06, 2021, Cyborg via Exim-users wrote:
>
> > these are clients, that send "GET /..whatever HTTP/1.0"В as greeting.
>
> sendmail and postfix drop the connection at least on GET, POST,
> CONNECT, e.g.,
>
Am 06.05.2021 um 11:43 schrieb Cyborg via Exim-users:
Everyone of us sees this in their logsfiles :
2021-05-06 11:07:57 no host name found for IP address 68.183.80.168
2021-05-06 11:07:58 no host name found for IP address 68.183.80.168
2021-05-06 11:07:58 SMTP call from [68.183.80.168]
On 06/05/2021 10:43, Cyborg via Exim-users wrote:
these are clients, that send "GET /..whatever HTTP/1.0" as greeting.
I think, that exim could be reliable
Nothing is reliable when dealing in that level of bogosity.
Please raise a wishlist-level bug for this.
I'm thinking in terms of an
On Thu, May 06, 2021, Cyborg via Exim-users wrote:
> these are clients, that send "GET /..whatever HTTP/1.0"?? as greeting.
sendmail and postfix drop the connection at least on GET, POST,
CONNECT, e.g.,
421 4.7.0 Rejecting open proxy
--
## List details at
Cyborg via Exim-users (Do 06 Mai 2021 11:43:58 CEST):
>
> 2021-05-06 11:07:58 no host name found for IP address 68.183.80.168
> 2021-05-06 11:07:58 SMTP call from [68.183.80.168] dropped: too many
> unrecognized commands (last was "Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate")
…
> I suggest:
>
> not to wait
Hi,
Everyone of us sees this in their logsfiles :
2021-05-06 11:07:57 no host name found for IP address 68.183.80.168
2021-05-06 11:07:58 no host name found for IP address 68.183.80.168
2021-05-06 11:07:58 SMTP call from [68.183.80.168] dropped: too many
unrecognized commands (last was
On 06/05/2021 02:31, Dan Egli via Exim-users wrote:
20095 LOG: MAIN PANIC DIE
20095 unable to set gid=12 or uid=8 (euid=1002): system filter
That's a basic syscall failure. My initial guess would be that
your use of symlinks, or maybe of setuid bits on binaries, is
the problem.
--
Cheers,
On 06/05/2021 01:32, 32.yves.roux--- via Exim-users wrote:
we have a spam/virus filtering system that add spam score and other info with
keywords at the beginning of the subject header
to inform the end-user and help him write sort-rules in his mail-client.
Example : {spam: 43} {newsletter}
20 matches
Mail list logo
