Re: any need for qmail-smtpd after qpsmtpd install?

2007-01-04 Thread Juerd
Ask Bjørn Hansen skribis 2007-01-04 14:21 (-0800): > Personally I often still keep a qmail-smtpd around anyway for > "internal bulk mail" - cronjob mails, internal relay from servers > sending administrative mails, etc... While I'm also still running a qmail-smtpd (for authenticated users), sy

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 17:02 -0500, David Kaufman wrote: > Hi Michael, > > Michael Holzt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I guess I would vote for Twiki if we were changing. > > > > Sorry, twiki isn't going to be installed on _any_ machine controlled > > by me. twiki has a bad history of (overly stu

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Fri, 2007-05-01 at 08:07 +1100, James Turnbull wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Guy Hulbert wrote: > > I don't think this is inconsistent with what I said. You have now > > confirmed your decision to not host the wiki if it must be twiki and if > > that is the case

Re: any need for qmail-smtpd after qpsmtpd install?

2007-01-04 Thread Ask Bjørn Hansen
On Jan 4, 2007, at 4:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've recently installed qpsmtpd on port 2525 on our qmail box (slackware). When I send an email to qpsmtpd it was delivered normally. As someone else pointed out, it's much easier to use queue/qmail-queue. Personally I often still keep a qmai

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread David Kaufman
Hi Michael, Michael Holzt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I guess I would vote for Twiki if we were changing. Sorry, twiki isn't going to be installed on _any_ machine controlled by me. twiki has a bad history of (overly stupid!) security incidents I was unhappy with my experiences with TWiki, to

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread James Turnbull
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Guy Hulbert wrote: > I don't think this is inconsistent with what I said. You have now > confirmed your decision to not host the wiki if it must be twiki and if > that is the case then I am willing to try to pick it up. I will keep > your opinions i

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 17:32 +0100, Michael Holzt wrote: > > Unless and until Michael decides that he no longer wants to host the > > wiki, I think he has the final word. > > No. While i "own" qpsmtpd.org and run the current wiki, my opinion is in > no way superiour than those of others. If the pro

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Tom Smith
Guy Hulbert wrote: On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 08:22 -0700, Tom Smith wrote: You may want to try etch. I expect to type: apt-get install twiki Ubuntu 6.06 LTS is gcc4--versions before that were not. All of the extra Perl modules I needed on 6.06 were installable via apt--only on

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Michael Holzt
> Unless and until Michael decides that he no longer wants to host the > wiki, I think he has the final word. No. While i "own" qpsmtpd.org and run the current wiki, my opinion is in no way superiour than those of others. If the project (as represented by us all) feels that a twiki would help it a

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Michael Holzt
> Unless and until Michael decides that he no longer wants to host the > wiki, I think he has the final word. No. While i "own" qpsmtpd.org and run the current wiki, my opinion is in no way superiour than those of others. If the project (as represented by us all) feels that a twiki would help it a

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 08:22 -0700, Tom Smith wrote: > > You may want to try etch. I expect to type: > > > > apt-get install twiki > > > > Ubuntu 6.06 LTS is gcc4--versions before that were not. > > All of the extra Perl modules I needed on 6.06 were installable via > apt--only one came

RE: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 16:54 +0100, Arnaud ASSAD wrote: > If twiki appears to be the best choice for most of the people, maybe > we > should all consider it on a pragmatic way. Unless and until Michael decides that he no longer wants to host the wiki, I think he has the final word. I am going to l

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Michael Holzt
> I can't really comment on your situation because I wasn't there... But I > think that sometimes it's prudent to keep such security problems > "secret" until a solution is found. > Discussing them (and their solutions) on mailing lists and such is one > thing, but publicly announcing the probl

RE: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Les Mikesell
On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 16:54 +0100, Arnaud ASSAD wrote: > If twiki appears to be the best choice for most of the people, maybe we > should all consider it on a pragmatic way. If it good enough for these guys... http://wiki.java.net (Just thought that was an interesting place to find a perl-based

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 09:53 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 16:34 +0100, Michael Holzt wrote: > > Sorry, twiki isn't going to be installed on _any_ machine controlled by > > me. twiki has a bad history of (overly stupid!) security incidents and > > its main developer (Peter Tho

check_earlytalker

2007-01-04 Thread qpsmtpdfrose . 20 . ftumsh
Lo all, I have a line in my config for check_earlytalker: check_earlytalker 1 log 0 I've put it to log because it was rejecting connections from some internal systems, possibly blat or a java scheduler. Is it possible, currently, to configure check_earlytalker to _not_ check particular ip addr

RE: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Arnaud ASSAD
Please don't take it personally: I don't know Peter I don't know you (For sure I'd like to change this if you come to France) I still get a mixed feeling about Twiki (especially about its security) But if I recall correctly, Peter is usually not trying to hide security holes, but rather let some

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 16:34 +0100, Michael Holzt wrote: > > I guess I would vote for Twiki if we were changing. > > Sorry, twiki isn't going to be installed on _any_ machine controlled > by > me. twiki has a bad history of (overly stupid!) security incidents > and > its main developer (Peter Tho

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Les Mikesell
On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 16:34 +0100, Michael Holzt wrote: > Sorry, twiki isn't going to be installed on _any_ machine controlled by > me. twiki has a bad history of (overly stupid!) security incidents and > its main developer (Peter Thoeny) has reacted very unfriendly and also > unprofessional to p

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread tony
Johan Almqvist writes: However even if there was a separate plugin repository and a vBulletin, I'd still want the wiki to direct all the forum (and list) RTFM's to... You just make those stick at the top of the (sub)forums... With the added benefit that you get a sort of web-of-trust as well

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Tom Smith
Michael Holzt wrote: I guess I would vote for Twiki if we were changing. Sorry, twiki isn't going to be installed on _any_ machine controlled by me. twiki has a bad history of (overly stupid!) security incidents and its main developer (Peter Thoeny) has reacted very unfriendly and also u

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Michael Holzt
> I guess I would vote for Twiki if we were changing. Sorry, twiki isn't going to be installed on _any_ machine controlled by me. twiki has a bad history of (overly stupid!) security incidents and its main developer (Peter Thoeny) has reacted very unfriendly and also unprofessional to people rep

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Tom Smith
Guy Hulbert wrote: On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 07:58 -0700, Tom Smith wrote: The largest installation woes... - Perl modules--most are part of standard Perl, but some had to be added CPAN is your friend ... but it's getting to be a bit of a monster. My strategy is to use it for a test ins

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Leander Koornneef
On 4-jan-2007, at 15:57, Guy Hulbert wrote: On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 15:14 +0100, Leander Koornneef wrote: May be a few days before I report further ... This may save you a bit of work if it's just for testing: Yeah. Saw that. However ... http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/TWikiVMDebian

Re: qpsmtpd or qpsmtpd-forkserver

2007-01-04 Thread Mark Farver
Michael Holzt wrote: Having RTFM, I have worked it out. I think I need to use the forkserver and not use tcprules. ie use the scripts in the wiki. For only 800 mails per day in my opinion tcpserver is fine as well. I process 8000-1000 mails per day and still use tcpserver (and a rather out

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Tom Smith
Robin Bowes wrote: Guy Hulbert wrote: There are better python wikis than trac. In particular moin-moin is quite close to the present docu-wiki. Moin-moin versus trac: http://www.wikimatrix.org/compare/MoinMoin+TracWiki Trac is missing a lot. I don't entirely disagree, but trac is m

Re: qpsmtpd or qpsmtpd-forkserver

2007-01-04 Thread Michael Holzt
> For only 800 mails per day in my opinion tcpserver is fine as well. I > process 8000-1000 mails per day and still use tcpserver (and a rather > outdated qpsmtpd 0.28 with custom patches). I meant 8000-1 mails per day. Regards Michael -- It's an insane world, but i'm proud to be a p

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 07:58 -0700, Tom Smith wrote: > The largest installation woes... > > - Perl modules--most are part of standard Perl, but some had to be > added CPAN is your friend ... but it's getting to be a bit of a monster. My strategy is to use it for a test install and then save all

Re: qpsmtpd or qpsmtpd-forkserver

2007-01-04 Thread Michael Holzt
> Having RTFM, I have worked it out. I think I need to use the forkserver > and not use tcprules. ie use the scripts in the wiki. For only 800 mails per day in my opinion tcpserver is fine as well. I process 8000-1000 mails per day and still use tcpserver (and a rather outdated qpsmtpd 0.28 with c

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Tom Smith
Arnaud ASSAD wrote: I'd also like to keep the wiki. To my mind, the tool is ok, We (In fact I should use 'I') only have to contribute more. There is, for example, a lot of knowledge on the ML which has not be put back on the wiki. One could also at how to create a mailing list archive with

RE: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 15:43 +0100, Arnaud ASSAD wrote: > I'd also like to keep the wiki. > > To my mind, the tool is ok, We (In fact I should use 'I') only have to > contribute more. > > There is, for example, a lot of knowledge on the ML which has not be put > back on the wiki. Twiki should be

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Tom Smith
Guy Hulbert wrote: On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 07:43 -0500, Guy Hulbert wrote: I guess I would vote for Twiki if we were changing. It seems that the latest twiki will be in etch and I have been planning to upgrade my server anyway. My thoughts have changed a bit since looking at the

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 15:14 +0100, Leander Koornneef wrote: > > May be a few days before I report further ... > > This may save you a bit of work if it's just for testing: Yeah. Saw that. However ... > > http://twiki.org/cgi-bin/view/Codev/TWikiVMDebianStable > > Leander ... I don't use win

RE: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Arnaud ASSAD
I'd also like to keep the wiki. To my mind, the tool is ok, We (In fact I should use 'I') only have to contribute more. There is, for example, a lot of knowledge on the ML which has not be put back on the wiki. Arnaud > -Message d'origine- > De : Michael Holzt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECT

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Tom Smith
James Turnbull wrote: Michael Holzt wrote: the page which is easily confused with a real navigation). So if one has better suggestions (i would also like to get rid of the security nightmare also known as php), i would like to hear about it. My preference is TWiki - stable, powerful, e

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Leander Koornneef
On 4-jan-2007, at 14:54, Guy Hulbert wrote: On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 07:43 -0500, Guy Hulbert wrote: I guess I would vote for Twiki if we were changing. It seems that the latest twiki will be in etch and I have been planning to upgrade my server anyway. My thoughts have changed a bit since lo

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 07:43 -0500, Guy Hulbert wrote: > > I guess I would vote for Twiki if we were changing. > > It seems that the latest twiki will be in etch and I have been > planning > to upgrade my server anyway. My thoughts have changed a bit since looking at the source. The install guide

qpsmtpd or qpsmtpd-forkserver

2007-01-04 Thread qpsmtpdfrose . 20 . ftumsh
Lo all, Given I am using the vanilla run file that came with the download: #!/bin/sh QMAILDUID=`id -u qpsmtpd` NOFILESGID=`id -g qpsmtpd` exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 2500 \ /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -c 10 -v -R -p \ -u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID `head -1 config/IP` 2525 \ ./qpsmtpd 2

Re: qpsmtpd or qpsmtpd-forkserver

2007-01-04 Thread qpsmtpdfrose . 20 . ftumsh
On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 12:54, JD wrote: > Given I am using the vanilla run file that came with the download: > Having RTFM, I have worked it out. I think I need to use the forkserver and not use tcprules. ie use the scripts in the wiki. I was unsure about the relay but a quick look in the config

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 23:58 +1100, James Turnbull wrote: > > I don't feel either of these will be a good replacement for the > current > > wiki. I agree that placing the plugin repository in the wiki wasn't > the > > best idea (I just couldn't think of a better way of doing it at the > time). > >

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread James Turnbull
Johan Almqvist wrote: >> 1) a vBulleting-webboard, and >> 2) rsync so that all those that want to can have their set of plugins >> in use (check with the configfile, and only rsync the active ones) >> shared with the world. > > I don't feel either of these will be a good replacement for the curren

Re: need for qmail smtpd

2007-01-04 Thread qpsmtpdfrose . 20 . ftumsh
On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 10:52, Michael Holzt - [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Could I just disable the qmail-smtpd and make qpsmtpd listen on port > > 25? > > You can. You just need to configure qpsmtpd to queue mail to qmail using > the appropiate queue plugin for qmail. This is very simple and muc

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
[ apologies for replying to my own post ... I delete most things after I read them but sent-mail is always there ] On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 06:58 -0500, Guy Hulbert wrote: > On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 11:26 +, Robin Bowes wrote: > > Michael Holzt wrote: > > > As some of you might or might now know, i'

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Johan Almqvist
Hello everyone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael Holzt writes: As some of you might or might now know, i'm the holder of the qpsmtpd.org domain and also host the qpsmtpd wiki on wiki.qpsmtpd.org. Now while the wiki still seems to be a good idea, i've noticed that there have been next to no cont

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 12:12 +, Robin Bowes wrote: > Guy Hulbert wrote: > > > There are better python wikis than trac. In particular moin-moin is > > quite close to the present docu-wiki. > > > > Moin-moin versus trac: > > http://www.wikimatrix.org/compare/MoinMoin+TracWiki > > > > Trac is m

any need for qmail-smtpd after qpsmtpd install?

2007-01-04 Thread qpsmtpdfrose . 20 . ftumsh
Lo all, I've recently installed qpsmtpd on port 2525 on our qmail box (slackware). When I send an email to qpsmtpd it was delivered normally. So, do I need the qmail-smtpd up and running at all? Could I just disable the qmail-smtpd and make qpsmtpd listen on port 25? It's just that the matt sarg

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Robin Bowes
Guy Hulbert wrote: > There are better python wikis than trac. In particular moin-moin is > quite close to the present docu-wiki. > > Moin-moin versus trac: > http://www.wikimatrix.org/compare/MoinMoin+TracWiki > > Trac is missing a lot. I don't entirely disagree, but trac is more than just a w

SMTPA

2007-01-04 Thread Nick Leverton
I think we discussed this before but I can't see it in the archives at the moment. Can qpsmtpd change its Received header from "with ESMTP" to "with ESMTPA" when SMTP auth is in use please ? This will let SpamAssassin recognise the auth header without any other changes. I've attached a tested

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Guy Hulbert
On Thu, 2007-04-01 at 11:26 +, Robin Bowes wrote: > Michael Holzt wrote: > > As some of you might or might now know, i'm the holder of the qpsmtpd.org > > domain and also host the qpsmtpd wiki on wiki.qpsmtpd.org. Now while the > > wiki still seems to be a good idea, i've noticed that there hav

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread tony
Michael Holzt writes: As some of you might or might now know, i'm the holder of the qpsmtpd.org domain and also host the qpsmtpd wiki on wiki.qpsmtpd.org. Now while the wiki still seems to be a good idea, i've noticed that there have been next to no contributions to it lately. This is a bit of a

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Robin Bowes
Michael Holzt wrote: > As some of you might or might now know, i'm the holder of the qpsmtpd.org > domain and also host the qpsmtpd wiki on wiki.qpsmtpd.org. Now while the > wiki still seems to be a good idea, i've noticed that there have been next > to no contributions to it lately. This is a bit

Re: Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread James Turnbull
Michael Holzt wrote: > As some of you might or might now know, i'm the holder of the qpsmtpd.org > domain and also host the qpsmtpd wiki on wiki.qpsmtpd.org. Now while the > wiki still seems to be a good idea, i've noticed that there have been next > to no contributions to it lately. This is a bit

Future of the wiki in 2007?

2007-01-04 Thread Michael Holzt
As some of you might or might now know, i'm the holder of the qpsmtpd.org domain and also host the qpsmtpd wiki on wiki.qpsmtpd.org. Now while the wiki still seems to be a good idea, i've noticed that there have been next to no contributions to it lately. This is a bit of a shame, as qpsmtpd lacks

Re: need for qmail smtpd

2007-01-04 Thread Michael Holzt
> So, do I need the qmail-smtpd up and running at all? No. qpsmtpd was originally designed to be a drop-in replacement for qmail-smtpd. It will for example read the same configuration files as qmail-smtpd does (plus the ones special to qpsmtpd). > Could I just disable the qmail-smtpd and make qps

need for qmail smtpd

2007-01-04 Thread qpsmtpdfrose . 20 . ftumsh
Lo all, I've recently installed qpsmtpd on port 2525 on our qmail box (slackware). When I send an email to qpsmtpd it was delivered normally. So, do I need the qmail-smtpd up and running at all? Could I just disable the qmail-smtpd and make qpsmtpd listen on port 25? It's just that the matt sarg