On Jun 25, 2010, at 11:11 PM, Linuxguy123 wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 18:53 -0700, Peter Langfelder wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Linuxguy123
>> wrote:
>>> Update
>>>
>>> I cloned the original 160 GB hard drive onto a new 160 GB SSD. The
>>> booting problem is even worse now.
On Jun 25, 2010, at 10:10 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> This announcement is a reminder that as of 2010-06-25, Fedora 11 has
> reached its end of life for updates. As planned, last update pushes
> to Fedora 11 were made in advance[1] of this dat
On 06/28/2010 12:57 PM, James Matthews wrote:
> Using open source tools is one thing. Google uses a combination of
> open and closed source anti spam tools. Since Gmail is so popular
> google is able to sample spam and learn to protect it from the get go
Too bad they don't seem to have outbound
Using open source tools is one thing. Google uses a combination of open and
closed source anti spam tools. Since Gmail is so popular google is able to
sample spam and learn to protect it from the get go
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 06/28/2010 11:56 AM, Tim wrote:
>
On 06/28/2010 11:56 AM, Tim wrote:
> Only a few thousand? What do you think is a huge list? And that's just
> your list of mail servers for one service... What about the other ISPs,
> the thousands of them?
>
Having a look at the SPF records
gmail.com. 300 IN TXT
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 20:30 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> have them send a dummy e-mail, wait 5 minutes and then send the
> important e-mail or wait 15 minutes. Hardly a big deal.
Do you really spend 15 minutes making someone wait around while you're
trying to conduct business that should only take
Passing SPF means nothing. That simply means that the email was sent from
an address the sender's MX record says is OK for sending email through it.
So an SPF that allows the entire Internet to use the mail relay still
passes. If an email does NOT pass SPF it's probably a good guess that it
is spam
Genes MailLists:
>>> So if you're gonna gray list - please whitelist all the standard ISP
>>> outbound mx hosts ...
Tim:
>> That's gotta be a huge list. And won't some of them be spam sources,
>> anyway?
Genes MailLists:
> Not huge at all - I'm doing this for the outbound MX's of trusted mai
From: "Genes MailLists"
Sent: Sunday, 2010/June/27 19:08
> On 06/27/2010 09:47 PM, Tim wrote:
>> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 14:08 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>> So if you're gonna gray list - please whitelist all the standard ISP
>>> outbound mx hosts ...
>>
>> That's gotta be a huge list. And w
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Jon Stanley wrote:
> There have been recent discussions on this list surrounding the fact
> that users feel left out of the Fedora decision making process. As the
> Fedora leadership, we'd like to do nothing more than engage the user
> community as key participants
On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 11:22 +0930, Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 13:11 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> >With GreetPause I am already causing a small delay which works very
> > well for those spammers/bots which are in violation of the standards.
> > However, I have carefully singled out al
On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 11:17 +0930, Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 14:08 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> > So if you're gonna gray list - please whitelist all the standard ISP
> > outbound mx hosts ...
>
> That's gotta be a huge list. And won't some of them be spam sources,
> anyway?
gre
On 06/27/2010 10:24 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 06/28/2010 10:13 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> I prefer the obvious and simple 'outbound MX host' ...
> IMHO, using a patently incorrect terminology only leads to confusion,
> mis-understanding, and results in ignorance when someone who doesn't
> know
On Sunday, June 27, 2010 07:25:31 Dale J. Chatham wrote:
> Calling all net nazis...
>
> Sheesh!
Are you calling me a nazi? Why?
I offered a technical solution that can basically remove most of the top/bottom
posting problems in an automatic way, fitting the preferences of each user
individuall
On 06/28/2010 10:13 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> I prefer the obvious and simple 'outbound MX host' ...
IMHO, using a patently incorrect terminology only leads to confusion,
mis-understanding, and results in ignorance when someone who doesn't
know any better or know the difference takes what you s
On 06/27/2010 10:04 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> This one particular client doesn't use whitelists and they don't
> experience any delays in delivery from those domains simply because they
> have been populated in the DB and due to the frequency they connect
> those records don't expire.
>
> Oh, FWIW,
On 06/27/2010 10:04 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 06/28/2010 09:47 AM, Tim wrote:
>> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 14:08 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>
> Maybemaybe not
>
> I just checked the logs from one client. There were multiple spam with
> email addresses of yahoo.com, yahoo.co.jp, and
On 06/27/2010 09:47 PM, Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 14:08 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> So if you're gonna gray list - please whitelist all the standard ISP
>> outbound mx hosts ...
>
> That's gotta be a huge list. And won't some of them be spam sources,
> anyway?
>
Not huge at all
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 17:28 -0400, Carroll Grigsby wrote:
> IIRC, KMail has (or had) a feature that would mark any new messages in
> such a thread as having been read on arrival. Good for the blood
> pressure.
And bad for the brain... You can't tell apart the ignored and unread,
from the has been
On 06/28/2010 09:47 AM, Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 14:08 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
>> So if you're gonna gray list - please whitelist all the standard ISP
>> outbound mx hosts ...
>>
> That's gotta be a huge list. And won't some of them be spam sources,
> anyway?
>
Maybe.
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 10:53 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
> While viewing any message in the thread, press the letter "k" on the
> keyboard. It's a shortcut for Message->Ignore Thread.
Does that have the benefit of also killing off thread hijacking? ;-)
(Where someone replies to a message, inste
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 13:11 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>With GreetPause I am already causing a small delay which works very
> well for those spammers/bots which are in violation of the standards.
> However, I have carefully singled out all major email MX outbound
> hosts for 0 greet pause. B
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 14:08 -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> So if you're gonna gray list - please whitelist all the standard ISP
> outbound mx hosts ...
That's gotta be a huge list. And won't some of them be spam sources,
anyway?
--
[...@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686
Don't
On Sat, 2010-06-26 at 21:54 -0400, William Case wrote:
> What is the name of the little application that pops up when you are
> trying to pick a new icon in a launcher ?
Dunno about current Fedora, but with Fedora 9, the whole thing starts
off from "gnome-desktop-item-edit". So, I might suggest
From: "Daniel B. Thurman"
Sent: Friday, 2010/June/25 14:46
>
> I thought it was sufficient to look into the headers
> of the offending email spammmers and add these respective
> IP address and/or host names to the /etc/mail/access file,
> but I am beginning to suspect that these headers could b
On 06/27/2010 05:37 PM, Remi Collet wrote:
>> You are correct, I stand corrected. The enigmain main page only states
>> 32-bit, but when you click on the download page you can get the 64-bit
>> version.
>
> addons.mozilla only provides extensions for official package.
> And mozilla only provides 3
On 06/27/2010 04:49 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
>
> This is the audit log of milter-greylist:
>
> type=AVC msg=audit(1277670351.513:52178): avc: denied { getattr } for
> pid=30048 comm="sendmail"
> path="/var/run/milter-greylist/milter-greylist.sock" dev=sda3
> ino=4114571 scontext=unconfined
On 06/27/2010 04:23 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
>
> Looks like I am running to a couple of problems:
>
> 1) Starting greylist-milter daemon:
> a) # service milter-greylist restart
> Stopping Milter-Greylist: [ OK ]
> Starting Milter-Greylist: /usr/sbin/
> You are correct, I stand corrected. The enigmain main page only states
> 32-bit, but when you click on the download page you can get the 64-bit
> version.
addons.mozilla only provides extensions for official package.
And mozilla only provides 32 bits build of Firefox.
All 64 bits package are on
On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 16:59:37 -0400
Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 04:53 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> > On Sunday 27 June 2010 01:31 PM, Robert Nichols wrote:
>
> > Would it be a worthwhile feature request? Then I would file an RFE
> > on the bugzilla.
> >
>
> Curious - How would you want
On Sunday 27 June 2010 01:59 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 04:53 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
>> On Sunday 27 June 2010 01:31 PM, Robert Nichols wrote:
>
>> Would it be a worthwhile feature request? Then I would file an RFE on
>> the bugzilla.
>>
>
>Curious - How would you want it to beha
On 06/27/2010 04:53 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> On Sunday 27 June 2010 01:31 PM, Robert Nichols wrote:
> Would it be a worthwhile feature request? Then I would file an RFE on
> the bugzilla.
>
Curious - How would you want it to behave differently than marking it
as junk mail ?
--
users mailing l
On Sunday 27 June 2010 01:31 PM, Robert Nichols wrote:
>>> While viewing any message in the thread, press the letter "k" on the
>>> >> keyboard. It's a shortcut for Message->Ignore Thread. A red circle
>>> >> with a diagonal slash will appear at the top of the thread, and you
>>> >> won't see
On 06/27/2010 01:23 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 12:45 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
>
>> On 06/27/2010 12:27 PM, Kevin J. Cummings wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 06/27/2010 12:45 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
I wanted to mention that there are some
On 06/27/2010 11:31 AM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> On Sunday 27 June 2010 08:53 AM, Robert Nichols wrote:
>> On 06/27/2010 07:19 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 14:05 +0530, steve wrote:
On 06/25/2010 01:48 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> On Friday 25 June 2010 12:
On 06/27/2010 12:45 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 12:27 PM, Kevin J. Cummings wrote:
>
>> On 06/27/2010 12:45 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> I wanted to mention that there are some in this posting that
>>> are recommending greylisting... but have not said anyth
On 06/27/2010 12:27 PM, Kevin J. Cummings wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 12:45 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
>
>
>> I wanted to mention that there are some in this posting that
>> are recommending greylisting... but have not said anything
>> about how this is implemented into sendmail... so, what is
>>
On 06/27/2010 03:27 PM, Kevin J. Cummings wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 12:45 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
>
>> I wanted to mention that there are some in this posting that
>> are recommending greylisting... but have not said anything
>> about how this is implemented into sendmail... so, what is
>> your
On 06/27/2010 12:45 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> I wanted to mention that there are some in this posting that
> are recommending greylisting... but have not said anything
> about how this is implemented into sendmail... so, what is
> your take on this?
yum install milter-greylist
and possibly
On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 12:26:57 +0100 Athmane Madjoudj wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 02:30 AM, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> > The system has informed me via the Update Applet that evolution needs to
> > be upgraded to 2.30.2-1, but the upgrade fails with these messages:
> > could not do simulate: empat
On 06/27/2010 10:06 AM, Craig White wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 09:45 -0700, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
>
>> On 06/27/2010 07:56 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/26/2010 07:57 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
THANKS! I have implemented the above recommendatio
On 06/27/2010 01:11 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>
>
Additionally - some of the gray list tools may not perform well if the
first reject is back to MX-host-1 and the next queue flush comes from
MX_host-2.
gmail, as an example, uses over 2,500 outbound mx hosts ... if queues
are shared (certainly
On 06/27/2010 12:45 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
good so far, but I will report back in a couple more days...
>
> I wanted to mention that there are some in this posting that
> are recommending greylisting... but have not said anything
> about how this is implemented into sendmail... so, what is
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 09:45 -0700, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 07:56 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> > On 06/26/2010 07:57 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> >
> >
> >> THANKS! I have implemented the above recommendations
> >> as well as a few other advices in this posting.
> >>
> >> Than
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/26/2010 09:49 AM, Remi Collet wrote:
> Le 26/06/2010 16:32, Steven Stern a écrit :
>> Enigmail's help files indicate that it may have something to do with
>> getting a version compiled to be compatible with "your distribution".
>> As far as I c
On 06/27/2010 07:56 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 06/26/2010 07:57 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
>
>
>> THANKS! I have implemented the above recommendations
>> as well as a few other advices in this posting.
>>
>> Thanks to all who participated - all very interesting to
>> know how others have
Hi Robert,
On Sunday 27 June 2010 08:53 AM, Robert Nichols wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 07:19 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 14:05 +0530, steve wrote:
>>> On 06/25/2010 01:48 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On Friday 25 June 2010 12:52 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
>If there are po
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 20:09 +0930, Tim wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-06-26 at 17:55 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> > I use greylisting on all mail servers that I administrate and I
> > specifically use one that maintains a list of well known smtp servers
> > such as yahoo - it's a rather substantial list and
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 10:53 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 07:19 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 14:05 +0530, steve wrote:
> >> On 06/25/2010 01:48 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> >>> On Friday 25 June 2010 12:52 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> If there are posts you
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 07:25 -0500, Dale J. Chatham wrote:
> Calling all net nazis...
[Please don't top-post on this list. Didn't you get the memo? :-]
If you read the OP's message you'll see his "solution" is entirely local
to each user. It has no effect on the list itself or on the list
archives
On 06/27/2010 07:19 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 14:05 +0530, steve wrote:
>> On 06/25/2010 01:48 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
>>> On Friday 25 June 2010 12:52 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
If there are posts you don't like think killfile.
>>>
>>> I keep hearing about this, how
On 06/27/2010 11:13 AM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 10:59 AM, Jerry Feldman wrote:
>>> maybe you should have a look at;
>>>
>>>http://enigmail.mozdev.org/news/index.php
>>>
>>>
>> I was just curious to see if I could get T-Bird and enigmail to ignore
>> the version warning. AFAIK, e
On 06/27/2010 10:59 AM, Jerry Feldman wrote:
>>
>> maybe you should have a look at;
>>
>>http://enigmail.mozdev.org/news/index.php
>>
>>
> I was just curious to see if I could get T-Bird and enigmail to ignore
> the version warning. AFAIK, enigmail has never really supported 64-bits.
> The only
On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 07:57:31 -0430
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> I like the unconscious irony of "if the context is clear". The *only*
> justification for top-posting is to be able to include the entire
> history of the thread in such a way as not to force the reader to deal
> with it. IOW it was
FC13/KDE
Trying to start virt-manager And I get this Error Message below, What
now ??
The network is running okay on br0 .
I tried to run gconf-cleaner, but I get the same Error Message.
Error Message:
Error starting Virtual Machine Manager: Failed to contact configuration
server; some pos
DKIM signed emails:
Not directly anti-spam but very related.
Major outbound MX mail is generally signed by DKIM (or domainkeys).
While I am not yet making rejection decisions on sigatures that fail - I
do have my mail client color them green/red when a DKIM/DK sig is good/bad.
I also ensure
On 06/26/2010 12:00 PM, g wrote:
> Jerry Feldman wrote:
>
>
>> I'm running 64-bit 3.1 with enigmail 1.01 with no problem.
> interesting. [note link below]
>
> 1.01? or do you mean 1.0.1?
>
> makes me wonder why enigmail folks came out with enigmail 1.1.1 and do not
> have a 64 bit version for thu
On 06/26/2010 07:57 PM, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> THANKS! I have implemented the above recommendations
> as well as a few other advices in this posting.
>
> Thanks to all who participated - all very interesting to
> know how others have tackled the their spam issues.
>
> I will report how it a
> http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2010/06/uptake-of-native-linux-zfs-port-hampered-by-license-conflict.ars
>
> "The CDDL does not restrict modification and release of the ZFS source
> code which is publicly available as part of OpenSolaris. The ZFS code
> can be modified to build as a CDDL
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Federico Marziali
wrote:
> Hello to the list again...
> While I'm still fighting with the display and nvidia drivers, I've
> come across another problem on my Sony Vaio, this time with the sound
> capture.
> Basically I can't get any of my microphones to record any
Calling all net nazis...
Sheesh!
On 06/27/2010 02:08 AM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> On Friday, June 25, 2010 00:50:10 JD wrote:
>
>> I see so many top-posting replies to threads, mixed with correct bottom
>> appended replies makes it very difficult to read a thread. Are there any
>> watchdogs o
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 19:35 +0930, Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 00:35 -0700, Julius Smith wrote:
>
> > * Top posting is more efficient for all if the context is clear
>
> Oh rubbish, it's just the easiest solution for the laziest. Nothing to
> do with "efficiency."
I like the unconscious
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 14:05 +0530, steve wrote:
> On 06/25/2010 01:48 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> > On Friday 25 June 2010 12:52 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> >> If there are posts you don't like think killfile.
> >
> > I keep hearing about this, how does one do that in Thunderbird? A quick
> > google sea
On 06/27/2010 02:30 AM, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> The system has informed me via the Update Applet that evolution needs to
> be upgraded to 2.30.2-1, but the upgrade fails with these messages:
> could not do simulate: empathy-2.30.1.1-1.fc13.x86_64 requires
> libedataserver-1.2.so.11()(64
On 06/27/2010 06:39 PM, Tim wrote:
> I don't mind people
> suggesting it, or implementing it well. But it should be advised with
> the appropriate precautions that you will need to manually add some
> overrides. And unless you monitor logs (many won't), or hear about
> problems in some other way
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 2:32 AM, dexter wrote:
> Thanks for the invitation :-) and I'd like to reciprocate.
> We welcome and encourage the board & contributors (that means YOU!)
> to participate constructively in these discussions by joining the User list.
Have been subscribed for years, and in
On Sat, 2010-06-26 at 17:55 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> I use greylisting on all mail servers that I administrate and I
> specifically use one that maintains a list of well known smtp servers
> such as yahoo - it's a rather substantial list and maintained so that
> pretty much obviates your point #
On 06/27/2010 06:11 PM, Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 08:55 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>
>> Do you know of any MTAs able to share outbound queues that would
>> account for this?
>>
> The issues I mentioned have cropped up on a few lists, but it hasn't
> been me analysing it. I seem to r
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 08:55 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Do you know of any MTAs able to share outbound queues that would
> account for this?
The issues I mentioned have cropped up on a few lists, but it hasn't
been me analysing it. I seem to recall that this list and yahoo were
two culprits.
--
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 00:35 -0700, Julius Smith wrote:
> * Top posting is more efficient for all if the context is clear
Oh rubbish, it's just the easiest solution for the laziest. Nothing to
do with "efficiency."
> * Top posting makes it easier to respond to only one point of many
Doesn't mak
Hi,
I want to mute the front speaker if my laptop only but keep the
headphones output active where my amplifier is connected to.
But when i click on the loadspeaker symbol in the panel and
select "mut" both frontspeakers and headphone output get muted.
Any pointers to a solution welcome.
-
On 06/27/2010 02:05 PM, steve wrote:
> On 06/25/2010 01:48 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
>> On Friday 25 June 2010 12:52 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
>>> If there are posts you don't like think killfile.
>>
>> I keep hearing about this, how does one do that in Thunderbird? A quick
>> google search yielded
On 06/25/2010 01:48 PM, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> On Friday 25 June 2010 12:52 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
>> If there are posts you don't like think killfile.
>
> I keep hearing about this, how does one do that in Thunderbird? A quick
> google search yielded some old threads leading up to no solutions or
>
Some points:
* Top posting is more efficient for all if the context is clear
* Top posting makes it easier to respond to only one point of many
* For the blind listening to text-to-speech reading of the page,
top-posting is the only way to go
* I vote for top-posting, including quoted snippets
On Friday, June 25, 2010 00:50:10 JD wrote:
> I see so many top-posting replies to threads, mixed with correct bottom
> appended replies makes it very difficult to read a thread. Are there any
> watchdogs on this list that tell top posters to stop it?
Umm, how about maybe take a look at:
http://l
75 matches
Mail list logo
