-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
As near as I can tell debian's clamav is just broken. It keeps whining
about clamd.ctl and nothing I can find on the web fixes it.
So fine. It's broken. I want it gone.
I tried commenting out the lines in master.cf and main.cf. But now it
co
David Benfell:
> As near as I can tell debian's clamav is just broken. It keeps whining
> about clamd.ctl and nothing I can find on the web fixes it.
>
> So fine. It's broken. I want it gone.
>
> I tried commenting out the lines in master.cf and main.cf. But now it
> complains about connection re
> The way I read his request is that he wants to forward non-spam
> only, and is looking for a Postfix solution that supports this.
>
> The best proposal I can come up with is a Milter that triggers on
> headers added by has spam filter, and that adds a second
> recipient only if the mail does not
On Sep 21, 2013, at 14:53, Jan P. Kessler wrote:
>> The way I read his request is that he wants to forward non-spam
>> only, and is looking for a Postfix solution that supports this.
>>
>> The best proposal I can come up with is a Milter that triggers on
>> headers added by has spam filter, and
> Would the single, existing instance with 'smtp_header_checks' not
> achieve the same thing?
>
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_header_checks
Not, if the required headers are added later on by a content_filter.
Am 21.09.2013 15:17, schrieb Jan P. Kessler:
> > Would the single, existing instance with 'smtp_header_checks' not
> > achieve the same thing?
> >
> > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_header_checks
>
> Not, if the required headers are added later on by a content_filter.
Just to be clea
On Sep 21, 2013, at 15:17, Jan P. Kessler wrote:
>> Would the single, existing instance with 'smtp_header_checks' not
>> achieve the same thing?
>>
>> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_header_checks
>
> Not, if the required headers are added later on by a content_filter.
The documen
> As I read it, 'smtp_header_checks' provides a way to do header checks only on
> messages that are leaving the system, leaving local delivery unaffected?
You are right. It should achieve the same.
On Sep 21, 2013, at 15:24, "Jan P. Kessler" wrote:
> Am 21.09.2013 15:17, schrieb Jan P. Kessler:
>>> Would the single, existing instance with 'smtp_header_checks' not
>>> achieve the same thing?
>>>
>>> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_header_checks
>>
>> Not, if the required heade
On Saturday, September 21, 2013 03:34:57 David Benfell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As near as I can tell debian's clamav is just broken. It keeps whining
> about clamd.ctl and nothing I can find on the web fixes it.
You didn't post your original configuration, so I don't know what your original
problem
> As I read it, 'smtp_header_checks' provides a way to do header
> checks only on messages that are leaving the system, leaving local
> delivery unaffected?
The SMTP client cannot add or remove recipients. The decision to
forward mail needs to be made before the queue manager.
Therefore, milter_
On Sep 21, 2013, at 16:36, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Saturday, September 21, 2013 03:34:57 David Benfell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As near as I can tell debian's clamav is just broken. It keeps whining
>> about clamd.ctl and nothing I can find on the web fixes it.
>
> You didn't post your origi
Am 21.09.2013 17:25, schrieb DTNX Postmaster:
> +1 on using Debian ClamAV packages without any problems. We use the
> milter package to integrate it with Postfix, using unix sockets.
>
> The problem people generally run into with unix sockets is one of
> permissions. The milter socket needs to
On Saturday, September 21, 2013 17:34:35 li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
> Am 21.09.2013 17:25, schrieb DTNX Postmaster:
> > +1 on using Debian ClamAV packages without any problems. We use the
> > milter package to integrate it with Postfix, using unix sockets.
> >
> > The problem people generally run int
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/21/2013 07:36 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Saturday, September 21, 2013 03:34:57 David Benfell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As near as I can tell debian's clamav is just broken. It keeps
>> whining about clamd.ctl and nothing I can find on the web
On Saturday, September 21, 2013 09:02:05 David Benfell wrote:
> On 09/21/2013 07:36 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 21, 2013 03:34:57 David Benfell wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> As near as I can tell debian's clamav is just broken. It keeps
> >> whining about clamd.ctl and no
On Sep 21, 2013, at 18:02, David Benfell wrote:
> On 09/21/2013 07:36 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> On Saturday, September 21, 2013 03:34:57 David Benfell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> As near as I can tell debian's clamav is just broken. It keeps
>>> whining about clamd.ctl and nothing I can find
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/21/2013 09:39 AM, DTNX Postmaster wrote:
>
> While the desire to have it 'just work' is recognizable, you cannot
> expect it to always do so if you copy bits and pieces from here to
> there without understanding what they actually do. Especia
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/21/2013 08:34 AM, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
>
> Am 21.09.2013 17:25, schrieb DTNX Postmaster:
>> +1 on using Debian ClamAV packages without any problems. We use
>> the milter package to integrate it with Postfix, using unix
>> sockets.
>>
>> The
On Sep 21, 2013, at 21:29, David Benfell wrote:
> On 09/21/2013 09:39 AM, DTNX Postmaster wrote:
>
>> While the desire to have it 'just work' is recognizable, you cannot
>> expect it to always do so if you copy bits and pieces from here to
>> there without understanding what they actually do. Es
On Sep 21, 2013, at 21:29, David Benfell wrote:
> At least within postfix, there is a very nice command to just fix the
> permissions. (Did Wietse get tired of seeing that particular problem?)
> I have no idea what they should be for clamd.ctl because, as near as I
> can tell, it isn't a permanen
I have an outgoing-only mail server for our customers called
smtp.lightlink.com. It only allows relaying from local IP's,
and known virtual domains if remote users wish to use it.
We were fine when we were running pop before smtp authentication, but
I was forced to also allow SASL auth
>I have an outgoing-only mail server for our customers called
>smtp.lightlink.com. It only allows relaying from local IP's,
>and known virtual domains if remote users wish to use it.
>
> We were fine when we were running pop before smtp authentication, but
>I was forced to also allow SASL aut
On Saturday, September 21, 2013 23:50:00 DTNX Postmaster wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2013, at 21:29, David Benfell wrote:
> > At least within postfix, there is a very nice command to just fix the
> > permissions. (Did Wietse get tired of seeing that particular problem?)
> > I have no idea what they should
Homer Wilson Smith:
>
> I have an outgoing-only mail server for our customers called
> smtp.lightlink.com. It only allows relaying from local IP's,
> and known virtual domains if remote users wish to use it.
>
> We were fine when we were running pop before smtp authentication, but
> I
25 matches
Mail list logo
