M. Fioretti:
above, one quickly learns that searching directly via Google *without*
site restrictions is *better*, as in more efficient than the
postfix.org search box.
Because, very often, it returns at least one or two task-focused
tutorials, pages from
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 06:38:39 AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
Unfortunately, many non-postfix-site howtos are wrong, with
exceptions such as Koetter et al.
OK.
Do not confuse search engine *popularity* with *quality*.
I never did. I just gave an explanation of something others observed.
It
On Wednesday, December 03, 2008 at 23:06 CET,
Roderick A. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Magnus Bäck wrote:
[...]
You can choose any username you like as long as it matches whatever
is in your credential database. So far we don't know anything about
that. MySQL, sasldb, LDAP,
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Wednesday, December 03, 2008 at 23:06 CET,
Roderick A. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Magnus Bäck wrote:
[...]
You can choose any username you like as long as it matches whatever
is in your credential database. So far we don't know anything about
that. MySQL,
I'm trying to test my Postfix/Dovecot set up to determine why (what I'm
doing wrong) a Perl script using Mail::Sender is failing. Errors say
connection failed -- rather ambiguous I'd say! :-)
This is for a system with multiple (virtual?) domains.
I'm using telnet to test but am having a
On Wednesday, December 03, 2008 at 19:52 CET,
Roderick A. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to test my Postfix/Dovecot set up to determine why (what
I'm doing wrong) a Perl script using Mail::Sender is failing. Errors
say connection failed -- rather ambiguous I'd say! :-)
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Wednesday, December 03, 2008 at 19:52 CET,
Roderick A. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to test my Postfix/Dovecot set up to determine why (what
I'm doing wrong) a Perl script using Mail::Sender is failing. Errors
say connection failed -- rather
Roderick A. Anderson a écrit :
Magnus Bäck wrote:
[snip]
Why do you insist on testing this with telnet? You will introduce
another possible error source (incorrect encoding of the credentials)
and it's a use case that you're supposedly not really interested in.
Because I can do it one step
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 00:02:33 AM +0100, mouss wrote:
Roderick A. Anderson a écrit :
Magnus Bäck wrote:
[snip]
Why do you insist on testing this with telnet?...
Because I can do it one step at a time and see the results that
Postfix sends back. I hadn't thought of telnet possibly
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 01:19:57AM +0100, M. Fioretti wrote:
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 00:02:33 AM +0100, mouss wrote:
Roderick A. Anderson a ?crit :
Magnus B?ck wrote:
[snip]
Why do you insist on testing this with telnet?...
Because I can do it one step at a time and see the
M. Fioretti:
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 00:02:33 AM +0100, mouss wrote:
Roderick A. Anderson a ?crit :
Magnus B?ck wrote:
[snip]
Why do you insist on testing this with telnet?...
Because I can do it one step at a time and see the results that
Postfix sends back. I hadn't thought
M. Fioretti a écrit :
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 00:02:33 AM +0100, mouss wrote:
Roderick A. Anderson a écrit :
Magnus Bäck wrote:
[snip]
Why do you insist on testing this with telnet?...
Because I can do it one step at a time and see the results that
Postfix sends back. I hadn't thought of
On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 01:45:35 AM +0100, mouss wrote:
not sure I undertsand what you have in mind. but lessee.
... see the archives if really interested.
Now, answering to this:
was this really long? difficult?
and to the comment along similar lines from Wietse:
Next time, try the SEARCH
13 matches
Mail list logo
