On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 09:40:21PM -0400, Charlie Brady wrote:
I think the -T *should* be there on the command line, but there are some
bugs in qpsmtpd and/or your plugins which need to be fixed before it will
work.
forkserver has used -T since 29ac2860, back in 2004. Obviously prefork is
On Thu, 21 May 2009, Devin Carraway wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 09:40:21PM -0400, Charlie Brady wrote:
I think the -T *should* be there on the command line, but there are some
bugs in qpsmtpd and/or your plugins which need to be fixed before it will
work.
forkserver has used -T since
After kludging the insecure dependency error...
I get 5 permanent copies of prefork in the process table, and one copy
that keeps on starting and dying (new PID every time I look). It seems to
take a long time before anything shows up in the log, though, which is why
it may have taken so long for
On Thu, 21 May 2009, J wrote:
I'll keep plugging at it :-/
Progress, I think.
I added back the sh -c '...' stuff to my run file, but without the other
stuff Charlie said shouldn't be there. Here's what I have now:
#!/bin/sh
exec 21 \
sh -c '
exec \
On Thu, 21 May 2009, Matt Sergeant wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2009, Devin Carraway wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 09:40:21PM -0400, Charlie Brady wrote:
I think the -T *should* be there on the command line, but there are some
bugs in qpsmtpd and/or your plugins which need to be fixed before
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 07:23:55AM +, Matt Sergeant wrote:
I guess this raises a question: The return values from config() are
tainted. Should we de-taint them?
I think so. Integrity of the config files is an issue handled much higher up,
not by taint checks way down in plugins.
--
J wrote:
Can we get this put into the wiki?
Feel free to edit the wiki. It's open to all.
Regards
James Turnbull
--
Author of:
* Pro Linux Systems Administration
(http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1430219122/)
* Pulling Strings with Puppet
(http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1590599780/)
*
On Tue, 19 May 2009, J wrote:
I reinstalled clean, from scratch.
I changed my 'run' file to the following:
#!/bin/sh
exec 21 \
sh -c '
exec \
/usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 1 \
${PERL-perl} -T ./qpsmtpd-prefork \
--port 25 \
--port 587
On Wed, 20 May 2009, Charlie Brady wrote:
I changed my 'run' file to the following:
#!/bin/sh
exec 21 \
sh -c '
exec \
/usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 1 \
${PERL-perl} -T ./qpsmtpd-prefork \
--port 25 \
--port 587 \
On Wed, 20 May 2009, Charlie Brady wrote:
So try:
#!/bin/sh
exec 21 \
exec \
/usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 1 \
/usr/bin/perl -T ./qpsmtpd-prefork \
--port 25 \
--port 587 \
--children 30 \
--idle-children 5 \
--renice-parent
On Wed, 20 May 2009, J wrote:
On Wed, 20 May 2009, Charlie Brady wrote:
So try:
#!/bin/sh
exec 21 \
exec \
/usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 1 \
/usr/bin/perl -T ./qpsmtpd-prefork \
--port 25 \
--port 587 \
--children 30 \
On Wed, 20 May 2009, J wrote:
I compared the run file with other run files (i.e. djbdns and qmail) and I
think the problem is with the trailing ' \' on the 2nd line (the first
exec).
Indeed. That shouldn't be there.
When I remove that (and installed a missing Math::BigInt package from
On Wed, 20 May 2009, J wrote:
On Wed, 20 May 2009, Charlie Brady wrote:
So try:
#!/bin/sh
exec 21 \
exec \
/usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 1 \
...
./run: line 2: exec: exec: not found
Sorry, I cut and pasted without checking each line. You are asking shell
to run this:
On Thu, 21 May 2009, Matt Sergeant wrote:
On Wed, 20 May 2009, J wrote:
When I remove that (and installed a missing Math::BigInt package from
CPAN), everything loads, but complains about an insecure dependency on
line 416 in setpriority (in qpsmtpd-prefork). (And the prefork processes
On Wed, 20 May 2009, Charlie Brady wrote:
Though it is probably a bug, I'm guessing we don't test with taint on.
Perl taint mode is an underutilised gem.
It is, but it's also buggy and annoying.
(there's a completely ignored bug in perl with -T and hash keys which I
filed months ago)
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:28 PM, Matt Sergeant m...@sergeant.org wrote:
(there's a completely ignored bug in perl with -T and hash keys which I
filed months ago)
Matt.
that hash keys are never tainted is documented, if that's your bug. It
allows for a quick and dirty
sub detaint($){ [
On Wed, 20 May 2009, David Nicol wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:28 PM, Matt Sergeant m...@sergeant.org wrote:
(there's a completely ignored bug in perl with -T and hash keys which I
filed months ago)
that hash keys are never tainted is documented, if that's your bug. It
allows for a
17 matches
Mail list logo
