Quoting Eric Rostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
What version of the sendmail packages did you have installed beforehand?
Could you have had a version that put it's sendmail.cf file in /etc?
Looks like it was _probably_ running sendmail 8.12.8-9.90.i386 before.
--
Eric Rostetter
The Department of
Quoting Eric Rostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
So you have another rh9 machine that still has an old sendmail package
on it?
I think I might have one for immediate access. I might also have another
one but I won't have access to it until probably Wednesday.
The one I had in mind is runing send
Quoting Marc Deslauriers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
It then created a new sendmail.cf from sendmail.mc.rpmnew!
This is not.
Did it leave a sendmail.cf.bak file? I have looked through the spec
file, through the init file and through the Makefile to try and find
some way for that to happen and I hav
On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 23:58 -0600, Eric Rostetter wrote:
> Okay, so I just upgraded a RHL 9 machine's sendmail from FL, and have my
> first case of missing symlinks.
>
The missing symlinks is a known issue. New packages are in bugzilla
awaiting QA to fix the issue.
> It left my sendmail.mc in pl
Okay, so I just upgraded a RHL 9 machine's sendmail from FL, and have my
first case of missing symlinks.
It left my sendmail.mc in place and created a new sendmail.mc.rpmnew.
It then created a new sendmail.cf from sendmail.mc.rpmnew!
If I do "m4 sendmail.mc.rpmnew sendmail.cf.from.rpmnew" and th
Quoting Michael Mansour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> *** ERROR: FEATURE() should be before MAILER()
>> *** ERROR: FEATURE() should be before MAILER()
>> *** ERROR: FEATURE() should be before MAILER()
Yeah, I got that on a bunch of machines. Just updated my sendmail.mc
to move the FEATURE macros up
Quoting Michal Jaegermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 10:24:12AM -0500, David Eisner wrote:
Eric Rostetter wrote:
>This sounds like what happens when we rush the QA processes...
Other distros had advance warning about this vulnerability, and hence
more time to apply patches an
Quoting David Eisner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Eric Rostetter wrote:
This sounds like what happens when we rush the QA processes...
Other distros had advance warning about this vulnerability,
So did FL technically.
and hence
more time to apply patches and do testing.
They didn't have more ti
Quoting Michael Kratz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Can you tell what was different between the old .cf and the new one?
The new cf appeared to be a 'fresh' default config file.
i.e. only bound to localhost, all my amavis and rbl stuff was missing, etc.
I don't doubt this. I just wanted to make sur
Hi Eric,
> Quoting Michal Jaegermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > I am not sure in which distro /usr/sbin/alternatives showed up
> > for the first time.
>
> It first showed up in RHL 7.3 as far as RHL goes. It originated in
> debian though...
>
> >> *** ERROR: FEATURE() should be before MAILER()
>> There seem to be three missing links on RH9 and FC1:
>>
>> /usr/lib/sendmail ->
>> /etc/alternatives/mta-sendmail
>>
> /usr/share/man/man8/sendmail.8.gz ->
>> /etc/alternatives/mta-sendmailman
>>
>> /etc/pam.d/smtp ->
>> /etc/alternatives/mta-pam
>>
>
>If you do a "alternatives
On Saturday 25 March 2006 10:54, MD wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 08:52 -0600, Mike Klinke wrote:
> > There seem to be three missing links on RH9 and FC1:
> If you do a "alternatives --config mta" and re-select sendmail,
> do the links get created?
Yes, they do ( on, at least, my RH9 test box
On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 08:52 -0600, Mike Klinke wrote:
> There seem to be three missing links on RH9 and FC1:
>
> /usr/lib/sendmail ->
> /etc/alternatives/mta-sendmail
>
> /usr/share/man/man8/sendmail.8.gz ->
> /etc/alternatives/mta-sendmailman
>
> /etc/pam.d/smtp ->
> /etc/alterna
On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 10:24 -0500, David Eisner wrote:
>
> Other distros had advance warning about this vulnerability, and hence
> more time to apply patches and do testing. Is there a way Fedora Legacy
> could be added to the list of vendors that are notified in this type of
> situation?
>
>
On Saturday 25 March 2006 11:45, Gene Heskett wrote:
>On Saturday 25 March 2006 11:29, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
>>On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 11:39:33AM +0100, Danny Terweij - Net Tuning
>> |
>
>Net wrote:
>>> My sendmail on FC3 boxes also not working correctly.
>>
>>Interesting. I actually did instal
On Saturday 25 March 2006 11:29, Michal Jaegermann wrote:
>On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 11:39:33AM +0100, Danny Terweij - Net Tuning |
Net wrote:
>> My sendmail on FC3 boxes also not working correctly.
>
>Interesting. I actually did install an update on an FC3 box and
>it did not need any corrections
On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 11:39:33AM +0100, Danny Terweij - Net Tuning | Net
wrote:
>
> My sendmail on FC3 boxes also not working correctly.
Interesting. I actually did install an update on an FC3 box and
it did not need any corrections after that.
> mailq was set as mailq.sendmail.
> newaliases
On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 10:24:12AM -0500, David Eisner wrote:
> Eric Rostetter wrote:
> >This sounds like what happens when we rush the QA processes...
>
> Other distros had advance warning about this vulnerability, and hence
> more time to apply patches and do testing.
Personally I _hugely_ pre
Eric Rostetter wrote:
This sounds like what happens when we rush the QA processes...
Other distros had advance warning about this vulnerability, and hence
more time to apply patches and do testing. Is there a way Fedora Legacy
could be added to the list of vendors that are notified in this t
On Saturday 25 March 2006 08:36, Marc Deslauriers wrote:
> That's pretty weird. It seems alternatives didn't create the link
> automatically.
There seem to be three missing links on RH9 and FC1:
/usr/lib/sendmail ->
/etc/alternatives/mta-sendmail
/usr/share/man/man8/sendmail.8.gz ->
On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 15:05 +0100, Christian Becker wrote:
> Hi all,
> Yesterday's sendmail update for RH9, going from 8.12.8 to 8.12.11, broke
> AUTH LOGIN for SMTP on our machine - all logins were rejected; logs were
> filled with "xyz did not issue MAIL/EXPN/VRFY/ETRN during connection to
> MTA"
Hi all,
Yesterday's sendmail update for RH9, going from 8.12.8 to 8.12.11, broke
AUTH LOGIN for SMTP on our machine - all logins were rejected; logs were
filled with "xyz did not issue MAIL/EXPN/VRFY/ETRN during connection to
MTA".
For anybody else affected: The fix for me was to copy
/etc/pam.d/sm
-
Fedora Legacy Update Advisory
Synopsis: Updated sendmail packages fix security issues
Advisory ID: FLSA:186277
Issue date:2006-03-23
Product: Red Hat Linux, Fedora Core
Keywords:
From: "Michael Kratz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> overwrote my sendmail.cf file and didn't create a .rpmnew or .rpmsave!
My sendmail on FC3 boxes also not working correctly.
mailq was set as mailq.sendmail.
newaliases was set as newaliases.sendmail
And maybe more is very wrong with this package
24 matches
Mail list logo
