qmail Digest 23 Jun 1999 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 680
Topics (messages 26989 through 27054):
qmail doesn't start properly
26989 by: Tero Niemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26990 by: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26991 by: Tero Niemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26997 by: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Unsubbing...
26992 by: Mark Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26994 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27008 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27038 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27049 by: Mark Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
relay ? kind of (I guess)
26993 by: "Claudiu Balciza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26998 by: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27030 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Auto-reply after delivery
26995 by: "Joaquim Homrighausen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26996 by: Anand Buddhdev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27046 by: "Nguyen Dang Phuoc Dong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Host hiding
26999 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
qmail/dns resolution
27000 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Free pop authentication before virtual domain smtp relay email package released
27001 by: "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newbie Question - Please Read!
27002 by: "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
etrn.pl replacement needed
27003 by: Ray Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27004 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27009 by: Ray Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27045 by: Anand Buddhdev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail Digest 21 Jun 1999 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 678
27005 by: Mate Wierdl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dan's back in the news
27006 by: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail-smtp and MUA's speed
27007 by: Bill Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Qmail binary packages license stuff
27010 by: "David Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27037 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newbye troubles (qmail-pw2u)
27011 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail + Maildir + procmail
27012 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27015 by: Mikko H�nninen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
TEST.receive failure
27013 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
SAMBA and Memphis RPM
27014 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
alias problem
27016 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Memphis RPM Pop3d
27017 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
changing domains
27018 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Multiple accounts
27019 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
can qmail do this thing ?
27020 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
What is *really* going on?
27021 by: Roy Rapoport <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27022 by: "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27024 by: Roy Rapoport <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27025 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27028 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27031 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27036 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Implementation of Virtual Domains
27023 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27033 by: Dave Kitabjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmailanalog question
27026 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
How to let qmail delivert more letters at the same time?
27027 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
What You Need T0 Know, 20%/80%?
27029 by: Kevin King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Users sharing home directory
27032 by: Conrad Heiney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27034 by: Stefan Paletta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Can't send through firewall (qmail+ipmasqerade)
27035 by: Jythexinvok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Qmail's queue directory & Linux
27039 by: "D. J. Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27041 by: Russell Steffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27043 by: Petri Kaukasoina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27044 by: "Peter van der Landen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27047 by: Petri Kaukasoina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27050 by: Petri Kaukasoina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail dying on stable system....
27040 by: qmlist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
27042 by: qmlist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
IT WORKS! - Anyone who is stuggling might benefit from this ...
27048 by: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Multiple accounts-more questions
27051 by: "Techservice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
WARNING: double delivery
27052 by: Stathakopoulos Giorgos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
trouble injecting bounce message
27053 by: Allen Versfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
virtual domains question
27054 by: Varga Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have qmail installed and working but I have to start it again
manually. My qmail.init which is run from rc.local like this:
/path/to/qmail.init &
It starts something but not all of the services. When I run manually it
after the boot it starts all remaining services. Init
file looks like this:
tcpserver -v -u 503 -g 502 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \
2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
tcpserver 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup eeva.alias.fi \
/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
csh -cf '/var/qmail/rc &'
Please help, because I'm going for a vacation and there's no one else
here who knows how to use linux... .:)
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Tero Niemi wrote:
> I have qmail installed and working but I have to start it again
> manually. My qmail.init which is run from rc.local like this:
>
> /path/to/qmail.init &
>
> It starts something but not all of the services. When I run manually it
> after the boot it starts all remaining services. Init
> file looks like this:
>
> tcpserver -v -u 503 -g 502 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \
> 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
> tcpserver 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup eeva.alias.fi \
> /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
> csh -cf '/var/qmail/rc &'
>
>
> Please help, because I'm going for a vacation and there's no one else
> here who knows how to use linux... .:)
>
>
Try giving the full path to tcpserver.
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flame-mail: /dev/null
# include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Tero Niemi wrote:
>
> > manually. My qmail.init which is run from rc.local like this:
> >
> > /path/to/qmail.init &
> >
> > It starts something but not all of the services. When I run manually it
> > after the boot it starts all remaining services. Init
> > file looks like this:
> >
> > tcpserver -v -u 503 -g 502 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \
> > 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
> > tcpserver 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup eeva.alias.fi \
> > /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
> > csh -cf '/var/qmail/rc &'
> >
>
>
> Try giving the full path to tcpserver.
>
> Vince.
Thanks put it didn't help... :( I still have to to /etc/rc.d/init.d and
run ./qmail.init & myself...
Should smtpd have some path too?-o
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Tero Niemi wrote:
> Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Tero Niemi wrote:
> >
> > > manually. My qmail.init which is run from rc.local like this:
> > >
> > > /path/to/qmail.init &
> > >
> > > It starts something but not all of the services. When I run manually it
> > > after the boot it starts all remaining services. Init
> > > file looks like this:
> > >
> > > tcpserver -v -u 503 -g 502 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \
> > > 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
> > > tcpserver 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup eeva.alias.fi \
> > > /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
> > > csh -cf '/var/qmail/rc &'
> > >
> >
> >
> > Try giving the full path to tcpserver.
> >
> > Vince.
>
> Thanks put it didn't help... :( I still have to to /etc/rc.d/init.d and
> run ./qmail.init & myself...
> Should smtpd have some path too?-o
>
>
If you mean the one before the 3, no. It's a service for the logger.
When you boot up, what does it say as these things load? Also, which
one isn't starting on bootup?
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flame-mail: /dev/null
# include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
I've just been hit by an upgrade to Netscape that looses the filter
settings.
I do not really want to unsub, but I need to lower my inbox traffic.
When I send an unsubscribe command, I get the reply-to-confirm
message...which, when sent, lands me with a message saying I'm not on
the list.....
I'm sending to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a list Mom out there?
Regards to you all.....
Mark Turner
+ Mark Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
| When I send an unsubscribe command, I get the reply-to-confirm
| message...which, when sent, lands me with a message saying I'm not on
| the list.....
|
| I'm sending to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Maybe you're not subscribed under the address you think you are
subscribed as. Look at the envelope sender of this message to find
out your subscription address. You will find the envelope sender
address in a Return-Path header (or a Unix From line if you're using
mbox format - not to be confused with the From header). My copy of
your message contained this:
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
from which you can deduce that I am subscribed as
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (the `@' sign has been replaced by `=').
You will need to send your unsubscription request from the address of
your subscription.
- Harald
Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>from which you can deduce that I am subscribed as
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (the `@' sign has been replaced by `=').
>
>You will need to send your unsubscription request from the address of
>your subscription.
Ooh, so close. Actually, he'll need to send the message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
where [EMAIL PROTECTED] is his subscription address, to unsubscribe.
See also:
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#mailing-lists
-Dave
+ Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
| Harald Hanche-Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >
| >You will need to send your unsubscription request from the address
| >of your subscription.
|
| Ooh, so close. Actually, he'll need to send the message to:
|
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| where [EMAIL PROTECTED] is his subscription address, to unsubscribe.
Well, if we are going to split hairs, he doesn't *need* to, but it may
be more convenient if he doesn't have a good way to set his
(envelope?) sender address on outgoing mail.
- Harald
Thanks for helping out.
In my header I see...
My Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So I sent a messageTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've received some qmail list items, now to see if I get this back!
Regards,
Markt
Our ISP experiences problems with the satellite dish.
I would like to instruct our qmail (1.03) server to send all outgoing mail
to another mail server.
I'm going to get a leased line for that but I don't know how to set up the
server.
(I read the FAQ, but to no avail)
Claudiu
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Claudiu Balciza wrote:
> Our ISP experiences problems with the satellite dish.
> I would like to instruct our qmail (1.03) server to send all outgoing mail
> to another mail server.
> I'm going to get a leased line for that but I don't know how to set up the
> server.
> (I read the FAQ, but to no avail)
Look at smtproutes
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flame-mail: /dev/null
# include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
Claudiu Balciza writes:
> Our ISP experiences problems with the satellite dish.
> I would like to instruct our qmail (1.03) server to send all outgoing mail
> to another mail server.
> I'm going to get a leased line for that but I don't know how to set up the
> server.
> (I read the FAQ, but to no avail)
Create a wildcard entry in smtproutes. I use one like this to send
all mail from my desktop to my server.
:mail.crynwr.com
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
I hope this one isn't in the FAQ..
.. what I'd like to do is to have something like:
./Maildir/
AutoReply..
in a given .qmail* file so that mail is first delivered to the user's
mailbox and then an automatically generated/canned reply is sent to
the sender of the mail.
Is this possible by using just qmail? If so, how? If not, what are the
preferred packages.. ?
-/- who dares wins -/-
On Tue, Jun 22, 1999 at 02:36:26PM +0200, Joaquim Homrighausen wrote:
> I hope this one isn't in the FAQ..
>
> .. what I'd like to do is to have something like:
>
> ./Maildir/
> AutoReply..
>
> in a given .qmail* file so that mail is first delivered to the user's
> mailbox and then an automatically generated/canned reply is sent to
> the sender of the mail.
In your .qmail file, you need:
./Maildir/
|/usr/bin/vacation <login name>
The standard unix vacation doesn't work very well with qmail, because it
stops reading a message after a certain size. On the qmail homepage, find a
replacement vacation program which apparently works better.
--
Anand
Try qmail vacation at
ftp://ftp.uniq.com.au/pub/tools/qmail/qmail-vacation-1.3.tar.gz
Dong
+--------------------------------------------------------------+-
+AHw- /+AFw--/+AFw- Nguyen Dang Phuoc Dong - Phuong Nam Net. +AHw-
+AHw- ( o o ) System Administrator. +AHw-
+AHw- +AD4AfgA8- Email: DongND+AEA-TLNET.COM.VN +AHw-
+--------------------------------------------------------------+-
-----Original Message-----
From: Joaquim Homrighausen +ADw-joho+AEA-defsol.se+AD4-
To: qmail discussion list +ADw-qmail+AEA-list.cr.yp.to+AD4-
Date: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 8:36 PM
Subject: Auto-reply after delivery
+AD4-I hope this one isn't in the FAQ..
+AD4-
+AD4-.. what I'd like to do is to have something like:
+AD4-
+AD4-./Maildir/
+AD4-AutoReply..
+AD4-
+AD4-in a given .qmail+ACo- file so that mail is first delivered to the user's
+AD4-mailbox and then an automatically generated/canned reply is sent to
+AD4-the sender of the mail.
+AD4-
+AD4-Is this possible by using just qmail? If so, how? If not, what are the
+AD4-preferred packages.. ?
+AD4-
+AD4-
+AD4-
+AD4--/- who dares wins -/-
+AD4-
+AD4-
+AD4-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> echo odel.on.ca > /var/qmail/control/defaulthost
> chmod 644 /var/qmail/control/defaulthost
>
> My question is does this affect anything but qmail-inject?
It only affects qmail-inject. However, unless odel.on.ca is a host you
own or have root on, I suggest that THIS IS A BAD IDEA. A VERY BAD
IDEA.
Here's why: "defaulthost" is a file which specifies the "default host"
of recipients. Hence, email addressed to "mybuddy" will now go to
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]". Yes, that's probably what you wanted.
BUT, what about cron jobs? Or any number of daemons and other tasks?
They often address email to "root". Where does that go? You guessed
it! "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"! Thus errors, output, and all sorts of junk will
go to the superuser of that machine.
In the best case, the administrator of odel.on.ca will be quite
annoyed. In the worst case, if your cron jobs do anything funny, the
admin will be very alarmed. Do not anger your admin--unless he's you.
Len.
--
Hast thou found honey? eat so much as is sufficient for thee, lest
thou be filled therewith, and vomit it. Withdraw thy foot from thy
neighbour's house; lest he be weary of thee, and so hate thee. --
Proverbs 25:16-17
On Sat, Jun 19, 1999 at 10:27:08AM -0400, Adam Rothschild wrote:
> Lame question time...
>
> qmail stopped delivering outbound mail, and is echoing error messages like
> this:
>
> Jun 19 09:26:08 fromagerie qmail: 929798768.674689 delivery 1307:
> deferral: Sorry,_I_couldn't_find_any_host_by_that_name._(#4.1.2)/
>
> However, all the nameservers defined in resolv.conf on this box *are* able
> to resolve this properly. Any advice/insight would be greatly
> appreciated.
What host name is it failing on?
Greetz, Peter
--
| 'He broke my heart, | Peter van Dijk |
I broke his neck' | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
nognikz - As the sun | Hardbeat@ircnet - #cistron/#linux.nl |
| Hardbeat@undernet - #groningen/#kinkfm/#vdh |
> I personally interviewed with microsoft 9 years ago and decided I didn't
> want to work in such a combative environment. I enjoy sharing
> ideas instead
> of bludgening my fellow developers with humiliation and degradation. So
> all of you out there who would like to get involved, email me.
Yes, that kind of behavior should be reserved for parties, among consenting
adults, not in the work environment.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 2:02 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Free pop authentication before virtual domain smtp relay email
> package released
>
>
>
> I finished beta testing a new version of vchkpw.
>
> download http://www.inter7.com/qmail/ look in middle of page
> or down farther in email for direct download file.
>
> It is modified to support this one new feature:
>
> If a virtual domain user authenticates for pop access..
> the smtp server is open to relay from that IP address
> for one hour. (defaults are not easily changed, must be programmer)
>
> When a user authenticates via pop.. the users IP address and current
> local time is recorded in a file. If the IP address is already in the
> file the old entry is deleted and the new entry is added. (Thus providing
> one more hour of relaying support).
>
> This package depends on the following Open Software packages:
>
> 1) qmail-1.03 off www.qmail.org authors home page.
> 2) tcpcontrol.. (ucspXXXstupid stuff) off the qmail authors home page.
> 3) vchkpw-3.4.2kj off http://www.inter7.com/qmail/vchkpw-3.4.2kj.tar.gz
>
> The documentation totally sucks. But the code works. Even if the required
> files are not present on the machine. Hopefully we can update the
> documentation so that it's alot easier to setup.
>
> Next version of vchkpw from inter7 site will support a
> "config;make;make install" format.
>
> Version after this will support the vchkpw authors new version that uses
> cdb hash files for fast lookup (we have noticed that virtual domains with
> less that 8K users have no problem with the 3.4.1 version). However, it's
> always better to make things more efficent. Hopefully sites with 1 million
> emails per virtual domain will work efficently.
>
> Next version after that will incorroprate more efficent use of virtual
> domain pop and alias/forward accounts for more than 8K users.
>
> Heh Heh. I don't think this all will get done for free, but hell, we are
> going to try. If you want to contribute email me back.
>
> Last thing we are going to try and do is create a distribution with the
> cool qmail things. Like a qmail base, tcpserver, ezmlm, autoresponder,
> virtual domains, web based admin for domains, web based email interface.
>
> I think a killer qmail distribution will send shock waves thru the
> open source community and get press off the national media outlets.
> Let's put another nail in microsofts coffin.
>
> From my Mentors conversations, "Revenge is nobel".
>
> Anyway.. later, you got the update from inter7 labs. we still have alot
> to do. but you've got the latest info.
>
> BTW: any web authors with good graphic skills who want to help build
> better free and non capitalistic web interfaces for qmail, which will
> help destroy the microsoft strangle hold on abusive competition, please
> email me back and lets combine forces.
>
> I personally interviewed with microsoft 9 years ago and decided I didn't
> want to work in such a combative environment. I enjoy sharing
> ideas instead
> of bludgening my fellow developers with humiliation and degradation. So
> all of you out there who would like to get involved, email me.
>
> Cheers
> Ken Jones
> Inter7
> <a href=mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wocka</a>
>
I used the Memphis distribution which I got from the qmail.org sit a link
called RPM (it's on moni something)
My current status is:
Deliveries work great.
Virtual Domains, and hosting works great.
POP3 authentication (checking mail from the outside world) fails
SAMBA is broken (I think due to the fact that the Memphis distribution
installs it's own TCP handling)
There have been a lot of helpful suggestions since Sunday as to what might
be wrong with POP3. My guess is that I need to change the qmail-pop3d.init
scripts in the rc#.d files to S...blah rather than K...blah so the sequence
is correct (this is one of the suggestions)
Since Sunday night I haven't been able to get to my Linux machine long
enough to try these suggestions. I'll keep the list appraised of what pans
out.
Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gene Campbell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 5:41 PM
> To: Alex Miller
> Subject: RE: Newbie Question - Please Read!
>
>
> I have tried one RPM. It didn't work. Can you point me to the RPM you
> used. (Yes, I am running RedHat Linux.) Also, are you able to check mail
> from the outside world? I want to be able to read and send from a client
> Mac, and a client PC. If the RPM you used didn't get you this far, than I
> might end up with half a system and totally confused to the point that I
> can't finish the job myself.
>
> thanks for the reply. - gene
>
> >well, if you have Redhat Linux like I do here has been my experience.
> >
> >I installed QMail using the tarball, running through each step
> carefully by
> >hand, and with help from members on this list, finally got it to work. I
> >could send mail out (unlike you) but I couldn't recieve remote
> email. I was
> >sure that I had done something wrong with the remove sendmail
> steps since my
> >system did not have things configured exactly as described in
> the INSTALL,
> >and I wasn't that confident in my guesses.
> >
> >So last night I took down the RPM's (a whole bunch of them, and set the
> >whole thing up, deleting my qmail install, rpm'ing the src, then
> rpming the
> >required preinstall stuff, and finally rpming qmail).
> >
> >When I rebooted it worked and was very different. There was a whole new
> >qmail process running when I did ps-aux, there was no
> /var/qmail/rc file at
> >all, there was a whole slew of extra .qmail-*** files in my alias folder,
> >and lo and behold it worked, in particular, I could now send myself mail
> >from the outside world.
> >
> >So my feeling is that Redhat systems are sufficiently different from the
> >norm that their own unique install of QMail is required and the
> only way to
> >get that right now, is by using RPM's.
> >
> >Alex Miller
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: gene Campbell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >> Sent: Saturday, June 19, 1999 1:25 AM
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: Re: Newbie Question - Please Read!
> >>
> >>
> >> I just tried this howto. It is the best one yet for helping understand
> >> this system. But, I still can't get smtp to work. That is if
> I send from
> >> another place to my system with qmail, it is bouced back. I get this
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mail.surfup.com.
> >> I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following
> >> addresses.
> >> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
> >>
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> Sorry. Although I'm listed as a best-preference MX or A for that host,
> >> it isn't in my control/locals file, so I don't treat it as
> local. (#5.4.6)
> >> ---
> >>
> >> I feel like I'm getting somewhere with this. But, I have no
> idea how I'm
> >> going to get POP mail working.
> >>
> >> - gene
> >>
> >>
> >> At 1:06 AM -0400 6/19/99, Dale Miracle wrote:
> >> >> Kevin King wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I recently got my RH Linux box working wtith Qmail (with a
> huge amount
> >> >> of help from Dave Sill). When I installed Qmail setup the following
> >> >> files as such:
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >I found this web site tonight that might help some people. I am also
> >> >trying to setup qmail my self because sendmail's virtual mail setup is
> >> >EVIL..I hate m4 and makemap <shudder>. Any how here is the link
> >> >http://www.flounder.net/qmail/qmail-howto.html
> >> >
> >> >I found it while searching through many howto's and web pages
> trying to
> >> >make sense of the hundreds of interpretations of the qmail doc's. I
> >> >read it all the way through and it sounds pretty good...to bad I found
> >> >it at 1 am :( I have been staring at this monitor of mine for over 3
> >> >hours now. I think I am just going to remove what I have and install
> >> >qmail fresh tomorrow.
> >> >I hope this help's, I know it made more sense to me...
> >> > Later,
> >> >--
> >> >
> >> >Dale Miracle
> >> > System Administrator
> >> > Teoi Net
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
I have installed Qmail on my machine at home, replacing sendmail.
Whenever my machine dials into my ISP, it issues etrn commands, telling my
ISP's SMTP mail servers to deliver all Email queued up for my machine.
Unfortunately, etrn is a sendmail utility, so it no longer works. I need
something that can, from a Qmail installed machine, tell a sendmail
installed machine to give me what's queued.
I did find "serialmail", and actually installed it. But the documentation
for talking to an ISP, seems to assume that the ISP is also running Qmail.
This is not the case here. They are still running sendmail, and I am now
running Qmail.
Can anyone point me in the proper direction?
/ Ray
------------------------------------+------------------------------------
Ray Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Unconditional Forgiveness & Love --
Chapel Hill NC or Sutton Mills NH | The corner stones of coexistence.
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Jun 22, 1999 at 11:32:26AM -0400, Ray Marshall wrote:
> I have installed Qmail on my machine at home, replacing sendmail.
>
> Whenever my machine dials into my ISP, it issues etrn commands, telling my
> ISP's SMTP mail servers to deliver all Email queued up for my machine.
> Unfortunately, etrn is a sendmail utility, so it no longer works. I need
> something that can, from a Qmail installed machine, tell a sendmail
> installed machine to give me what's queued.
>
> I did find "serialmail", and actually installed it. But the documentation
> for talking to an ISP, seems to assume that the ISP is also running Qmail.
> This is not the case here. They are still running sendmail, and I am now
> running Qmail.
>
> Can anyone point me in the proper direction?
-- snip
[root@zopie] ~# cat /usr/local/sbin/etrn
#!/bin/sh
nc etrn.vuurwerk.nl 25 << EOF 2>&1 > /dev/null
EHLO attic.vuurwerk.nl
ETRN attic.vuurwerk.nl
QUIT
EOF
-- snip
Replace attic.vuurwerk.nl with your domainname (use multiple ETRN lines for
multiple domains, keep the one EHLO). Replace etrn.vuurwerk.nl with the
hostname of the ISP mailserver.
Also, a simple fetchmail line will do the job just as well. I just forgot
what the line was :)
Greetz, Peter
--
| 'He broke my heart, | Peter van Dijk |
I broke his neck' | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
nognikz - As the sun | Hardbeat@ircnet - #cistron/#linux.nl |
| Hardbeat@undernet - #groningen/#kinkfm/#vdh |
Thanks Peter. Thanks also to Petr Novotny and Peter C. Norton, for their
assistance.
I have modified Peter's little script into something more general, that
doesn't have to be modified in order to be used. And to which one
provides the remote SMTP mail server name as a paramter -- a fully
qualified hostname. Find etrn.sh attached to this Email.
Can someone get it added to the Qmail as another utility? I realize that
it uses nc (netcat), which isn't shipped with all systems. I would
suggest a note somewhere that points out the requirment. We should also
test fetchmail (see below), and add an ETRN note to the FAQ.
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> Also, a simple fetchmail line will do the job just as well. I just forgot
> what the line was :)
Now this one caught me by surprise! I've been using fetchmail to get my
POP3 mail, for several years. It never occurred to me, to look for ETRN
capabilities there. Well Peter, you're right.
The way I use fetchmail, I have a .fetchmailrc file that tells it how to
pull down all POP3 mailboxes my ISP provides me -- a separate line is
needed for each mailbox, and you can redirect their messages to any local
unix account name.
But, for ETRN, the logic is a lot simpler. The information CAN be
provided on the command line. But, since I already use .fetchmailrc, I've
made my changes there. My ISP has two SMTP mail servers (to spread the
load). So, I just added two lines to the end of my rc file:
poll smtp1.vnet.net with protocol ETRN
poll smtp2.vnet.net with protocol ETRN
I haven't tested these changes yet, but according to the man page, it
should work.
So now we know that there are (at least) two generic mechanisms for
picking up SMTP mail:
etrn.sh <mail.server>
and
fetchmail
Just like UNIX! Multiple methods, to accomplish the same end.
/ Ray
------------------------------------+------------------------------------
Ray Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Unconditional Forgiveness & Love --
Chapel Hill NC or Sutton Mills NH | The corner stones of coexistence.
Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#!/bin/sh
nc $1 25 << EOF 2>&1 > /dev/null
EHLO `hostname``dnsdomainname`
ETRN `hostname``dnsdomainname`
QUIT
EOF
On Tue, Jun 22, 1999 at 01:32:13PM -0400, Ray Marshall wrote:
Just an addition: For those who don't have fetchmail or nc, tcpclient from
ucspi-tcp provides the same functionality as nc. No need to install
additional software if we have tcpclient.
> Thanks Peter. Thanks also to Petr Novotny and Peter C. Norton, for their
> assistance.
>
> I have modified Peter's little script into something more general, that
> doesn't have to be modified in order to be used. And to which one
> provides the remote SMTP mail server name as a paramter -- a fully
> qualified hostname. Find etrn.sh attached to this Email.
[snip]
--
Anand
I made a typo, see below.
Mate
On Tue, Jun 22, 1999 at 11:20:24AM -0400, Alex Miller wrote:
> > this would start/stop the pop3d daemon automatically upon system
> > start/stop/restart
> >
> > It is simpler to do
> >
> > chkconfig qmail-pop3d on
Do
chkconfig qmail-pop3d.init on
Mate
The justice dept (actually clinton) asks for a rehearing:
http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/20333.html
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] flame-mail: /dev/null
# include <std/disclaimers.h> TEAM-OS2
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
At 03:02 PM 6/15/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Bill Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I am running qmail with tcpserver, and want to know if there is
>>any way to make qmail respond faster to smtp/pop3d requests other than
>>going through a DNS lookup...
>
>Huh? How would going through a DNS lookup speed this up?
>
>Disabling identd lookups, using the "-R" flag to tcpserver might
>help. Or possibly just shortening the timeout via "-t".
>
Well, here is my qmail startup script for smtp and pop3...
Stuff above deleted to save space...
case "$1" in
start)
echo -n "Starting: "
env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
qmail-start ./Maildir/ splogger qmail &
echo -n "qmail "
env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
tcpserver -H -R -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c20 -u7791 -g2108 0 smtp \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 > /dev/null &
echo -n "smtp "
env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:/usr/local/bin" \
tcpserver -H -R -b30 -c10 0 pop3 \
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup odie.donbest.com \
/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
echo "pop3d"
stuff below deleted to save space...
Now, I do have the -R flag going to tcpserver (as shown above), will
adding -t5 (for a max 5 seconds) help, or are they mutually exclusive?
>
>If your DNS is slow, you'll see delays all over the place, and, yes,
>running your own caching nameserver will help.
I bought a copy of the ORA DNS/Bind book 3rd edition, which I am
going over now...<slow reading..heh>...
-Bill
Hey,
I have a set of RPMs which is a drop-in replacement for sendmail on a RedHat
6.x/5.x linux system. I didn't like the RPMS which were currently available,
so I made my own. I'm now exploring the possibility (repeat _possibility_)
of distributing these packages for stuff other than my own internal use.
But since I've modified the install, I believe I'm am forbidden by the qmail
license. Can I get around this by distributing the .src.rpm files and
instructing the user to build it themselves. I think there is some RPM
install option that will do this nicely for the user.
Any thoughts? Do the current qmail RPM distributions create an _exact_ copy
of the qmail install as they are required to, or did I miss something?
- David Harris
Principal Engineer, DRH Internet Services
David Harris writes:
> But since I've modified the install, I believe I'm am forbidden by the qmail
> license. Can I get around this by distributing the .src.rpm files and
> instructing the user to build it themselves. I think there is some RPM
> install option that will do this nicely for the user.
Yes and yes. rpm --rebuild foo.src.rpm will nicely build a binary RPM from
the source RPM.
>
> Any thoughts? Do the current qmail RPM distributions create an _exact_ copy
> of the qmail install as they are required to, or did I miss something?
My source RPM does anything BUT create a standard vanilla Qmail install.
--
Sam
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>I am a new qmail user running a redhat 5.1 with no shadow password.
>As this is my fisrt try at managing mail, i still have troubles
>understanding how things are kept.
>
>It looks like i am able to recieve and to send mail with one account
>(the one i m using) but i dont understand how to add user.
You don't have to. All normal users can send and receive mail by
default. qmail-users is only necessary when you want to pre-empt
normal delivery to a user.
>The doc says, use qmail-pw2u, this shall read /etc/passwd and create
>a valid /var/qmail/users/assign file.
>
>If i run qmail-pw2u, nothings happens. No error message, i loose hand
>on the shell and it doesnt give it back. I have waited more than 5
>minutes (for a /etc/passwd with no more than 10 user).
It's waiting for input. It reads the password file on standard
input. If you really want to run it, do:
qmail-pw2u </etc/passwd >/var/qmail/users/assign
>So, i have try to make the assign file by hands, trying to add zonegris.
>Here is what i have tryed in assign,
>=zonegris:zonegris:503:502:/home/zonegris::
>.
>
>But if i try qmail-newu it generate a bad format in assign.
>
>I guess i havent understood what are the 2 fields after the home
>directory.
See:
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#qmail-users
-Dave
"Mark E. Drummond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I now have mail being forwarded to my machine from our hub. However it
>is being spooled on /var/spool/mail/mark. Here is my /var/qmail/rc:
>
>exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
>qmail-start ./Mailbox sh -c 'accustamp | cyclog -s 500000 -n 10
>/var/log/qmail'
>
>Which would normally deliver to ~/Mailbox only my ~/.qmail:
>
>|preline /usr/local/bin/procmail
>
>runs it through procmail. My procmail is the Maildir capable version and
>my ~/.procmailrc is (shorted for clarity):
>
>PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin
>MAILDIR=$HOME/Maildir
>LOGFILE=$MAILDIR/log/log.`date +%y-%m-%d`
>SHELL=/bin/sh
>
>:0:
>* ^(From|Cc|To).*mutt.*@mutt.org
>mutt/
Try adding:
LOGFILE = $MAILDIR/from
LOGABSTRACT=all
VERBOSE=on
then examine $MAILDIR/from after a delivery.
>So mail from the mutt list(s) should get dumped into ~/Maildir/mutt/, a
>Maildir format mail box which should be created by procmail as needed
>no?
I doubt it, but I don't know "the Maildir capable version" of
procmail.
>Mail still being spooled on /var/spool/mail/mark. Wasn't there something
>about procmail delivering to there regardless of the .procmailrc?
You need a catch-all recipe like:
:0:
$HOME/Mailbox
at the bottom of your .procmailrc to prevent /var/spool/mail
deliveries.
>Would I be better off just going to maildrop?
No doubt.
Also, see:
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#procmail
for more qmail/procmail tips, although it's still not 100% complete.
-Dave
Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 22 Jun 1999:
> You need a catch-all recipe like:
>
> :0:
> $HOME/Mailbox
>
> at the bottom of your .procmailrc to prevent /var/spool/mail
> deliveries.
Actually, setting
DEFAULT=$HOME/Mailbox
... should work just as well, even if there's nothing wrong with setting
a catch-all recipe. And procmail might also be smart enough to use the
contents of the MAIL environment variable if that's been properly when
procmail is run defined, though I'm not sure about this.
--
// Mikko H�nninen, aka. Wizzu // [EMAIL PROTECTED] // http://www.iki.fi/wiz/
// The Corrs list maintainer // net.freak // DALnet IRC operator /
// Interests: roleplaying, Linux, the Net, fantasy & scifi, the Corrs /
Support bacteria -- it's the only culture some people have.
"Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>telnet 127.0.0.1 25
>Trying 127.0.0.1...
>Connected to 127.0.0.1
>Escapee character is '^]'
>Connection closed by foreign host.
Assuming you followed the basic installation instructions, port 25 is
controlled by inetd. You should have a line in /etc/inetd.conf that
tells it to run qmail-smtpd when a TCP connection is made to port
25. You also need to send inetd a signal telling ti to reread
inetd.conf. On most (all?) Linuxes, that can be done via:
killall -HUP inetd
Note that "killall" on other systems such as Solaris kills *all*
processes, not just the named process. Talk about a gotcha...
-Dave
"Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Now that I have installed the Memphis RPM of QMail I no longer can access
>Linux files from Windows.
I really doubt the qmail RPM broke samba.
>But with the tarball, I could not run telnet 127.0.0.1 25 without a
>disconnect.
Because you either didn't configure it correctly or didn't HUP inetd.
>So I think that the TCP/IP handling that SAMBA was doing prevented QMail
>from accepting mail but that the new ucsp-tcpi rpm from the Memphis RPM is
>allowing QMail to work but not Samba.
I think its a coincidence.
-Dave
Clayton Weaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>qmail-1.0.1
>linux-2.0.36
>libc-5.4.33
>gcc-2.7.2.1
>binutils-2.8.1.0.18
And fastforward, too?
>The odd thing is that mail to postmaster@local_domain is redirected
>to the real_user mentioned in ~alias/.qmail-postmaster, but mail
>to news@local_domain, operator@local_domain, webmaster@local_domain,
>and apparently all of the rest of them bounce, despite having the
>same redirect in those other .qmail-aliasname files.
What does the bounce say? What do the logs say?
>My only guess is that it isn't looking there first for the redirect,
>it's looking in /etc/aliases.cdb. The qmail-start line that starts
>the daemon is
>
>/path/to/qmail/bin/qmail-start '|fastforward -d /etc/aliases.cdb' \
> /path/to/cyclog /var/log/mail &
>
>(that's exactly how it reads, in /etc/rc.inet2).
That means that if qmail-local can't find a matching .qmail file, to
deliver to fastforward. So it tries alias.cdb *last*, not first.
>/etc/aliases has lines like
>
>mailer-daemon: real_user
>MAILER-DAEMON: real_user
>Mailer-Daemon: real_user
>postmaster: real_user
>operator: real_user
>webmaster: real_user
But you have ~alias/.qmail-postmaster, ~alias/.qmail-operator,
~alias/.qmail-webmaster, etc? What's the point of specifying both? If
the ~alias files exist, the alias.cdb entries will never be used.
>... These aren't real accounts, ie there is no user account on the
>machine called webmaster for example, although that doesn't seem to
>make a difference.
It certainly does!
>(I noticed the problem when I started getting bounce messages
>from root cron jobs, meaning it was failing to redirect root@local_domain
>from cron to real_user@local_domain.
WTF is local_domain? Is it a secret or something?
-Dave
"Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>There was a problem logging onto your mail server. Your User Name or
>Password was rejected. Server Response: '-ERR' authorization failed".
>(Account: 'TestLinuxBox', POP3 Server:
>'r84aap011904.sbo-nwt.ma.cable.rcn.com', Error Number: 0x00cc92).
>
>So, it seems that pop-3 is a running service, but that checkpassword is not
>reading my /etc/passwd file correctly (I guess).
Try this test from www.qmail.org:
Mark Delany has a clever way to test your checkpassword with a bit of
command line re-direction. For example, with username fred, password
bloggs, printf "fred\0bloggs\0Y123456\0" | /bin/checkpassword /bin/id
3<&0 will execute /bin/id if the password is right.
-Dave
>I want messages sent to user@domain1 to be forwarded to user@domain2.
>How can I do this?
On domain1, create a ~alias/.qmail-user file containing:
&user@domain2
Of course, that only makes sense if "domain1" is one of your local
domains. You haven't told us what "domain1" and "domain2" are, or
whether they're local, remote, real or virtual.
>I tried setting up a virtual domain
>domain1:alias-1
>
>and putting
>| forward "$LOCAL"@domain2
>in ~alias/.qmail-1-default
>
>but this causes the message to loop
If that's looping, it's because user@domain2 goes to the same mailbox
as user@domain1. A->B and B->A. The message has no home.
-Dave
"Techservice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>A customer wishes to have this setup
>
>"dave"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>"mark"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>: : :
That's one address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The "dave" and "mark" bits are
comments.
-Dave
"Urania.C.F.Chang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> if i want to do a thing like this ...
>
> qmail receives a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] from local or SMTP from
>network, and qmail will re-send this message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>at remote mailserver.
>
> i can do this by sendmail,
> but i don't know how to config qmail to do it ....
echo "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > ~alias/.qmail-somebody
See also:
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#aliases
-Dave
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, gene Campbell wrote:
> Question: How important is it to understand all the details with regard
> to installation and starting up? And, if you think it is important, what
> resources should I get ahold of to fast track the learning process?
Being a Qmail neophyte (I've been running it for about five days now), I'm
drawing on my system administration experience rather than Qmail experience
here: I'd say that it's very nice to understand all the details, because
then you'll have a much easier time troubleshooting the system and what's
going on with it. Understanding a system (whether it's an MTA, a router,
whatever) on a deep enough level gets you to the point where much of the
first steps of troubleshooting is almost intuition-driven rather than "must
go through this extensive list of steps to figure out what's wrong" sort of
thing.
-roy
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Roy Rapoport wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, gene Campbell wrote:
> > Question: How important is it to understand all the details with regard
> > to installation and starting up? And, if you think it is important, what
> > resources should I get ahold of to fast track the learning process?
> Being a Qmail neophyte (I've been running it for about five days now), I'm
> drawing on my system administration experience rather than Qmail experience
> here: I'd say that it's very nice to understand all the details, because
> then you'll have a much easier time troubleshooting the system and what's
> going on with it. Understanding a system (whether it's an MTA, a router,
> whatever) on a deep enough level gets you to the point where much of the
> first steps of troubleshooting is almost intuition-driven rather than "must
> go through this extensive list of steps to figure out what's wrong" sort of
> thing.
Right, but remember... you must know approximately 80% of qmail just to
make it useful for you -- whereas the number was quoted to be about 20%
for sendwhale.
You know, one big bad@$$ computer company is where it is now because it
allowed any such idiot to install software by simply clicking the little
"ok" box. Qmail has a different approach -- it appears soon one will
most likely have to prove proof of PHD in order to receive the software.
Scott
ps: It's a joke! It's only a joke! Well, partely, at least.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBN2/fSx4PLs9vCOqdAQGxXQP+Jxif+yd9+g64YMcKPSR8S2TOrlbl7J+h
3Xo9IYpmcQcPx1UhyNciFPwHd3TYCtj0xX7wR3oxglUFt/5GQqEvm436MGL+l+1R
iz0746FeqTAYurbvxVsCEIOukdto4Br9GSKI6P94mbsPKUZOVc1bFgBjxyOJ8JAH
AjT9F9jLvmI=
=kchl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Scott D. Yelich wrote:
> Right, but remember... you must know approximately 80% of qmail just to
> make it useful for you -- whereas the number was quoted to be about 20%
> for sendwhale.
Really? That's not been my experience. It took me days of experimentation
with sendmail to get it to do what I wanted when I first started with it,
and a small number of hours (2-3) to set up qmail. I still don't know that
much about qmail (for example, I don't know off the top of my head what
each of the different parts does), but it's running just very fine for me,
with some unusual requirements.
-roy
"Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Right, but remember... you must know approximately 80% of qmail just to
>make it useful for you -- whereas the number was quoted to be about 20%
>for sendwhale.
Hogwash. These 20%/80% numbers are pulled from thin air. Even if they
were accurate, though, 20% of sendmail is probably on the same order
of complexity as 80% of qmail.
>You know, one big bad@$$ computer company is where it is now because it
>allowed any such idiot to install software by simply clicking the little
>"ok" box.
DJB should emulate Microsoft? Har, har.
-Dave
gene Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Question: How important is it to understand all the details with regard
>to installation and starting up?
That depends. If it does everything you want now, and its not a busy
mailhub, it's probably not important. But if you're an ISP hosting
virtual domains and virtual users, mailing lists, etc., it's very
important.
>And, if you think it is important, what
>resources should I get ahold of to fast track the learning process?
"Life with qmail", of course. :-)
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html
> Big question on the matter are, for example, what is going on in all
>those .init files?
What .init files?
>Why were all those (ps vax) processes set up that way?
See:
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#architecture-apdx
-Dave
Dave Sill writes:
> "Scott D. Yelich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >You know, one big bad@$$ computer company is where it is now because it
> >allowed any such idiot to install software by simply clicking the little
> >"ok" box.
>
> DJB should emulate Microsoft? Har, har.
Recognition is easier than remembering any day. I don't see why one
must be a monopolist to recognize that. Maybe you just forgot ?
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
On Tue, Jun 22, 1999 at 12:16:41PM -0700, Roy Rapoport wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Scott D. Yelich wrote:
> > Right, but remember... you must know approximately 80% of qmail just to
> > make it useful for you -- whereas the number was quoted to be about 20%
> > for sendwhale.
>
> Really? That's not been my experience. It took me days of experimentation
Yeah, really. But that 20% of sendmail is about 2350times as big as that
80% of qmail :)
Greetz, Peter
--
| 'He broke my heart, | Peter van Dijk |
I broke his neck' | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
nognikz - As the sun | Hardbeat@ircnet - #cistron/#linux.nl |
| Hardbeat@undernet - #groningen/#kinkfm/#vdh |
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Regarding the below instructions, I realize that the use of .qmail-* files
>is how Qmail was "designed". But I find them to be rather clumsy.
First, qmail wasn't "designed", it was designed.
Second, you're entitled to your opinions, of course. I find them
pretty elegant, myself.
>For example, what if you have mail coming in to
>
> .qmail-name1
> .qmail-name2
> .qmail-name3
>
>Unless most of them are forwarding, aren't we going to have to create
>multiple stores, as in ./Maildir1, ./Maildir2, ... in the users home
>directory?
No. You can either save them to a common store, or individual
stores. It's up to the user to decide. Want them all to go to
~/Maildir? Put "~/Maildir/" in all three files. Want them to go to
~MaildirN? Put "~/Maildir1/" in .qmail-name1, "~/Maildir2/" in
.qmail-name2, etc.
>(I'm assuming that the entry in "assign" is a wildcard, as:
>
> +domain.com:popuser:888:888:/usr/qmail/popboxes/domain.com:-::)
>
>The implementation I prefer is specifying EVERY domain in "virtualdomains",
>such as:
>
> domain1.com:domain1.com
> domain2.com:domain2.com
>
>Then every user gets a private home directory and .qmail file (for
>convenience, organized by domain):
>
> /usr/qmail/popboxes/domain1.com/name1/.qmail
> /usr/qmail/popboxes/domain1.com/name1/Maildir/
>
>and there is a separate "assign" entry for each recipient of each domain:
>
> =domain1.com-name1:popuser:888:888:/usr/qmail/popboxes/domain1.com/name
>1:-::
> =domain1.com-name2:popuser:888:888:/usr/qmail/popboxes/domain1.com/name
>2:-::
> =domain2.com-name1:popuser:888:888:/usr/qmail/popboxes/domain1.com/name
>1:-::
YUCK. So every time Podunk, Inc., wants to add a new user, you have to
update users/assign and rebuild users/cdb? What about wildcards?
>We're an ISP, and it seems that Qmail was designed for a system with a
>bunch of local users and that we're sort of having to "coerce" Qmail into
>serving our needs.
Not at all. qmail is designed to allow user-administered virtual
domains and mailing lists. This is ISP-friendly behavior...unless
you've got lots of spare time for handling petty user requests like
this or automating the process.
>I realize that the .qmail-* approach makes sense from a Unix point of view,
>allowing all maildrops for that "user"
"domain administrator"
>to reside in a common directory. But
>that implementation doesn't seem like it would scale well to large systems
>with many domains as does the single-uid/virtualdomains approach.
Why not? Where does it break down?
>(Keep in
>mind that we have automated the creation, deletion, forwarding, passwords,
>etc of all accounts via a Telnet interface which we have linked through a
>Visual Basic gui [coupled via a Sql Server database] that all our phone
>reps can access, and we plan to put support for all these services on a web
>page soon).
If it's all automated, how does diddling users/assign and various
.qmail files scale better than just diddling various .qmail files?
>With the single-uid/virtualdomains approach, every mail drop
>can be manipulated with the same, automated interface.
I fail to see where the "single-box domains" approach, as you call it,
prevents that.
>2) Are there any drawbacks to the single-uid/virtualdomains approach?
Users can't manage their own virtual domains without elaborate,
privileged, homegrown web-sql-telnet-gui interfaces.
-Dave
Ah, Dave,
A very insightful and informed response.
I've made some comments below.
On Tuesday, June 22, 1999 3:13 PM, Dave Sill [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
...
> >Unless most of them are forwarding, aren't we going to have to create
> >multiple stores, as in ./Maildir1, ./Maildir2, ... in the users home
> >directory?
>
> No. You can either save them to a common store, or individual
> stores. It's up to the user to decide. Want them all to go to
> ~/Maildir? Put "~/Maildir/" in all three files. Want them to go to
> ~MaildirN? Put "~/Maildir1/" in .qmail-name1, "~/Maildir2/" in
> .qmail-name2, etc.
Okay. In that implementation, we'd probably use ~/Maildir-name1/,
~/Maildir-name2/ ...
...
> >and there is a separate "assign" entry for each recipient of each
domain:
> >
> > =domain1.com-name1:popuser:888:888:/usr/qmail/popboxes/domain1.com/name
> >1:-::
> > =domain1.com-name2:popuser:888:888:/usr/qmail/popboxes/domain1.com/name
> >2:-::
> > =domain2.com-name1:popuser:888:888:/usr/qmail/popboxes/domain1.com/name
> >1:-::
>
> YUCK. So every time Podunk, Inc., wants to add a new user, you have to
> update users/assign and rebuild users/cdb? What about wildcards?
I see your point. We could reduce our size and traffic to "assign" using
wildcards and a bunch of .qmail-* files and Maildir/ stores.
We have a <domain>.assign and <domain>.pop file for each domain we host. We
have a cron job that checks every 5 minutes if there are any newly-modified
.assign or .pop files; if so, it cats them all together and recompiles the
appropriate CDB. It works rather beautifully, but I don't think it's easy
to tell whether this approach or the other would scale better. (Keep in
mind that I never have to touch /etc/passwd).
> >We're an ISP, and it seems that Qmail was designed for a system with a
> >bunch of local users and that we're sort of having to "coerce" Qmail
into
> >serving our needs.
>
> Not at all. qmail is designed to allow user-administered virtual
> domains and mailing lists. This is ISP-friendly behavior...unless
> you've got lots of spare time for handling petty user requests like
> this or automating the process.
...
> Users can't manage their own virtual domains without elaborate,
> privileged, homegrown web-sql-telnet-gui interfaces.
I see your point. User-administration is a real plus. Except for one major
drawback: the user needs to know basic Unix or, at best, can get away with
running shell scripts. Either way, he has to Telnet into a command-line
interface. Anything higher-level than that and you're designing tools like
we have. (Then there's the security threat of allowing everyone Telnet
access).
Anyway, your points are well taken. Hopefully, we won't get burned down the
road (we basically followed a popular single-uid HOWTO!). If for some
reason we have to change down the road, I'll be writing some hefty shell
scripts to migrate everyone!
Thanks again for your insight.
Dave
Brandon Dudley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Is it normal, when using the "zuids" script in qmailanalog, to see an
>abnormal ammount of messages comming from user qmaild?
No, an abnormal amount of anything is, by definition, not normal.
>mess bytes sbytes rbytes recips tries xdelay uid
>105 287318 307020 307020 107 107 2.140147 16
> 7 3278 3278 3278 7 7 21.896689 500
> 7 5710 5710 5710 7 7 6.261182 501
> 1 13651 13651 13651 1 1 0.011327 503
> 1 874 874 874 1 1 0.007452 507
> 4 3870 11610 11610 12 13 62.494407 510
qmail-smtpd runs as qmaild, so messages received via SMTP will acquire
its UID. Whether or not 105 SMTP submissions is normal depends on your
system.
-Dave
Hotdog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> There is too many letters to delivert in our server,
Upon what information do you base that claim?
> although I have set both 'concurrencylocal' and
> 'concurrencyremote' to 120,It seems too low.
Do you ever have 120 qmail-local or qmail-remote processes running? If
not, they're not too low.
> And the letter sent to our server will be received at least half
> an hour later.. :(
Oops, I smell a trigger problem. Do "make check" from the source tree
or verify that trigger looks a whole lot like:
root@sws5# ls -l /var/qmail/queue/lock/trigger
prw--w--w- 1 qmails qmail 0 Jun 22 15:30 /var/qmail/queue/lock/trigger
> Can anyone one tell me how can I set the value
> concurrencylocal&concurrencyremote more high?
Modify conf-spawn and rebuild qmail.
-Dave
Guys,
I probably (at this time) know less about Qmail and Linux than all of you.
BUT, I feel comfortable with how it works because of one reason - I needed
to learn it in order to get things running. When I started I knew nothing
about Linux or the mail system at all - 0%.
But I Iearned BEST by installing QMAIL from Tar files (not RPMS), and by
asking questions of you guys. No I couldn't just click on "INSTALL" - but
now that I've struggled through it, I have learned how it works. I'd rather
"struggle and learn" than "click and trust"
anyday - heck that's what old "Brother Bill" wants you to do. I'll still be
asking questions, but while things initially look overwhelming (at least
for a newbie), when it's all over you KNOW how things work.
By the way - A public thanks to Dave Sill. I would not have learned
anything without his patience.
Hello!
I am converting a Sendmail system in which pop users did not have separate home
directories; they all share one /home/popuser type directory. Obviously, qmail
hates this. Obviously, what I have to do is make a home directory for each user
that lacks one, do a usermod to set that directory as theirs, change its
ownership to them, and then do the move spool and symlink dance to set them up
with both Mailbox and legacy /var/spool/mail support.
My question is this; has anyone else got a swift, nifty script that does some
or all of these things already? It would make my life easier. :-)
Thanks,
Conrad :)
----------------------------------
Conrad Heiney
University Access, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://universityaccess.com/
----------------------------------
Conrad Heiney wrote/schrieb/scribsit:
> I am converting a Sendmail system in which pop users did not have separate home
> directories; they all share one /home/popuser type directory. Obviously, qmail
> hates this. Obviously, what I have to do is make a home directory for each user
qmail will handle this just fine!
read man qmail-users and take a look at
http://www.tibus.net/pgregg/projects/qmail/single-uid-howto.txt
Stefan
Hi, hopefully someone can help with this problem.
I've been trying to get q-mail up and running on our new subnetwork,
mail can currently be recieved correctly (./Mailbox via NFS) and can be
sent from the gateway/firewall machine, but if we attempt to send
through the firewall to the outside (or for that matter between machines
inside the firewall) the messages seem to just disappear.
I'm not sure what information would help in describing, but here is
as much of the setup as I can think off.
Our domain is 'else.somewhere.edu', but our firewall sits on
'somewhere.edu'. We are not registered in any way shape or form outside
our firewall.
We are using ipchains to masquerade our network. 'phyast.pitt.edu'
is 1.2.3.x while our network is 192.168.100.x. The gateway mainly
occupies 1.2.3.49 & 192.168.100.1 (it recieves mail for several other
1.2.3.x ips, which seems to work fine). All mail sent from
192.168.100.x too anywhere simply dissapears.
Any ideas here?
thanks for any help you ppl can pass along.
<wave>
Peter van der Landen writes:
> Should I conclude from this that somehow Linux is extra vulnerable to queue
> corruption
Yes. See http://pobox.com/~djb/qmail/faq/reliability.html for some
discussion of this issue.
---Dan
On 23 Jun 1999, D. J. Bernstein wrote:
> Peter van der Landen writes:
> > Should I conclude from this that somehow Linux is extra vulnerable to queue
> > corruption
>
> Yes. See http://pobox.com/~djb/qmail/faq/reliability.html for some
> discussion of this issue.
>
> ---Dan
This obviously implies that having the queue on a separate partition or
disk for Linux systems is a good thing (so that it can be mounted with
"sync"). Are there any guidelines for how big a queue filesystem should
be? And how gracefully does qmail handle a full queue fs ?
Russ
--
Russ Steffen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Jun 22, 1999 at 05:22:46PM -0700, Russell Steffen wrote:
> This obviously implies that having the queue on a separate partition or
> disk for Linux systems is a good thing (so that it can be mounted with
> "sync").
If you want to do that then you want a sync filesystem for the
Maildirs/mboxes too.
-----Original Message-----
From: Petri Kaukasoina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, June 23, 1999 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: Qmail's queue directory & Linux
>On Tue, Jun 22, 1999 at 05:22:46PM -0700, Russell Steffen wrote:
>> This obviously implies that having the queue on a separate partition or
>> disk for Linux systems is a good thing (so that it can be mounted with
>> "sync").
>
>If you want to do that then you want a sync filesystem for the
>Maildirs/mboxes too.
That's what the Cyrus documentation suggests.
The Cyrus documentation suggests using chattr -R +S on the queue directories
as well as the mailboxes. Would that be less effective than using a
sync-mounted filesystem?
Regards,
Peter
On Wed, Jun 23, 1999 at 08:04:53AM +0200, Peter van der Landen wrote:
> The Cyrus documentation suggests using chattr -R +S on the queue directories
> as well as the mailboxes. Would that be less effective than using a
> sync-mounted filesystem?
Dan fsyncs explicitely all the _files_ when needed, so there's no problem
with them. But in Linux the metadata, e.g. the directory entries are not
written synchronously by default. Suppose qmail receives a mail message,
writes it to the queue, fsyncs it and reports mail received. In case of
power failure at this point the file was written ok but its directory entry
was not on disk yet. After bootup fsck puts the message to /lost+found
where you can find it but it is not in the qmail queue.
The solution that Linus proposed was to fsync the _directory_ too in
addition to the _file_ and that is what my shared library does. Actually it
fsyncs the directories every time when link, unlink, open and rename system
calls are used (they update directory entries), needed or not.
Dan's suggestion is to mount all the file systems with option "sync". It
makes all writing to that file system synchronous which might be a bit
overkill when the problem is only with metadata.
chattr +S is a good idea but it doesn't work. I guess it works for _files_:
a file with that attribute is written synchronously. But there is no problem
in that field in case of qmail because Dan uses fsyncs. (With sendmail,
procmail, poppers and imappers it may be different.) But chattr +S does not
make writing the directory entries synchronous which is the problem. I
tested it a year ago and it didn't work for Linux kernels in use at that
time.
You can try it yourself to see if it works or not with kernels today:
1. mkdir testdir1 testdir2
2. chattr +S testdir2
3. killall -KILL update
4. sync
5. echo "without -S" > testdir1/file1
6. echo "with -S" > testdir2/file2
7. switch off the power
8. switch on the power
9. after fsck look for the files in the directories /lost+found, testdir1
and testdir2.
If the chattr trick worked you would have the file "file2" in the
directory testdir2.
On Wed, Jun 23, 1999 at 09:49:27AM +0300, Petri Kaukasoina wrote:
> You can try it yourself to see if it works or not with kernels today:
> ...
Actually that might not be a valid test because file2 was not fsynced. It's
hard to remember what was done a year ago... But I used a program similar to
the attached one to create and fsync the test file. So this might be valid
now.
1. gcc -o testprog testprog.c
2. mkdir testdir
3. chattr +S testdir
4. cd testdir
5. killall -KILL update
6. sync
7. ../testprog
8. switch off the power
9. switch on the power
10. after fsck look for the file "testfile" in the directories testdir and
lost+found (under the mount point of the file system)
If the chattr trick worked you would have "testfile" in "testdir". Otherwise
you would find it in lost+found.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
int main()
{
int fd;
char *message = "testing\n";
if ((fd=open("testfile",O_CREAT|O_RDWR|O_EXCL,0666))==-1) perror("open");
if (write(fd,message,strlen(message))==-1) perror("write");
if (fsync(fd)==-1) perror("fsync");
if (close(fd)==-1) perror("close");
return 0;
}
Every once in a while (it's happened only about three times in the last
month), qmail quietly dies on one of my servers. By and large this hasn't
been much of a problem, since I'm running two identical servers for inbound
and outbound mail - just a small handful of messages that sit in the queue
waiting for delivery.
I'm wondering if anyone else has seen this error, and can help interpret it:
Jun 22 14:13:50 e4500B qmail: 930086030.484072 starting delivery 706: msg
6089 to remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jun 22 14:13:50 e4500B qmail: 930086030.484301 status: local 0/10 remote 1/20
Jun 22 14:16:19 e4500B qmail: 930086179.745469 delivery 706: success:
162.70.34.51_accepted_message./Remote_host_said:_250_Ok/
Jun 22 14:16:19 e4500B qmail: 930086179.745849 status: local 0/10 remote
2/20 exitasap
Jun 22 14:16:19 e4500B qmail: 930086179.746042 end msg 6089
Jun 22 14:16:46 e4500B qmail: 930086206.258141 delivery 709: deferral:
Connected_to_208.230.117.241_but_sender_was_rejected./Remote_
host_said:_451_<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>..._Sender_domain_must_resolve/
Jun 22 14:16:46 e4500B qmail: 930086206.258485 status: local 0/10 remote
1/20 exitasap
Jun 22 14:17:11 e4500B qmail: 930086231.612324 delivery 714: deferral:
Sorry,_I_wasn't_able_to_establish_an_SMTP_connection._(#4.4.1
)/
Jun 22 14:17:11 e4500B qmail: 930086231.612680 status: local 0/10 remote
0/20 exitasap
Jun 22 14:17:11 e4500B qmail: 930086231.612877 status: exiting
---------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Theodoropoulos Advanced TelCom Group, Inc.
Senior Unix Systems Administrator Internet Services Division
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Santa Rosa, California, US
At 05:16 PM 6/22/99 , you wrote:
>Every once in a while (it's happened only about three times in the last
>month), qmail quietly dies on one of my servers. By and large this hasn't
>been much of a problem, since I'm running two identical servers for
>inbound and outbound mail - just a small handful of messages that sit in
>the queue waiting for delivery.
i left out some details, dumb.
hardware: sun e4500. software: solaris 7, 64bit kernel. compiler: sun
workshop 5.0. qmail 1.03, built 32bit (builds fine 64bit, but won't run).
qmail invoked as:
qmail-pw2u < /etc/passwd > /var/qmail/users/assign ; qmail-newu
(/bin/env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
supervise $DIR qmail-start ./Maildir/ splogger $PROG & ) \
&& echo "$PROG \c" && status
Maildir's are on Netapps, i.e. NFS. qmail queue is on two dedicated
mirrored disks.
the system(s) are under very light load currently - they're only serving
staff email until we roll out service with customers. so to the best of my
knowledge, this isn't a resource issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Theodoropoulos Advanced TelCom Group, Inc.
Senior Unix Systems Administrator Internet Services Division
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Santa Rosa, California, US
> Now you have to make qmail-pop3d run at boot
> Go to /etc/rc.d/rc3.d/ (or whatever runlevel you normally boot into)
> You should find that in this directory there is a link called
> K<n>qmail-pop3d.init , where <n> is a two digit number
> Now look for the link S<N>qmail.init, where <N> is another two digit
> number
> Rename K<n>qmail-pop3d.init to S<a>qmail-pop3d.init , where <a> is any
> two digit number you like as long as it is larger than <N>
> Restart or equivalent
Or use chkconfig, which manages all of the links for you and can give you
a summary of what's turned on and what's not.
> To summarize the rpm installs symbolic links to the qmail-pop3d.init
> script in the rc.d subdirectories. However it gives them numbers lower
> than the qmail.init script. This means that the pop3d script executes
> before the rest of qmail. Since it depends on other parts of the qmail
> system it fails.
What parts of the qmail system does qmail-pop3d depend on?
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Subject: Re: Multiple accounts
>"Techservice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>A customer wishes to have this setup
>>
>>"dave"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>"mark"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>: : :
>
>That's one address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The "dave" and "mark" bits are
>comments.
>
>-Dave
>
Ok the customer has picked up a new setup
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
will the single-uid-HOWTO work here, the details seem to be for multiple
domains.
thanks
Does anyone know why is this happening?
Jun 22 18:40:58 machine qmail: 930066058.357501 warning: trouble marking
remote/2/59434; message will be delivered twice!
Jun 22 18:40:58 machine qmail: 930066058.357787 warning: unable to unlink
remote/2/59434; will try again later
Thanx,
G.Stathakopoulos
For the last week, I've had this message recurring in my log files every
2 minutes (and 4 seconds!)
It sounds fairly straightforward, but *which* bounce message, to whom,
etc?
1999-06-23 10:59:28.533289 warning: trouble injecting bounce message,
will try later
1999-06-23 11:01:32.553240 warning: trouble injecting bounce message,
will try later
1999-06-23 11:03:36.573619 warning: trouble injecting bounce message,
will try later
It doesn't seem to be affecting mail delivery (At least, none of my
users have complained...), but obviously *something* is amiss...
Any ideas?
--
Allen Versfeld
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wandata
"Freedom is the ability to choose your own restrictions"
If I make a virtualdomains file, and make the usual .qmail-... files in
the given user's home directory, as forwarding to a real user of the
system,then the mail arrives in order to the expected place.
The mail envelope is the following:
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 04 15:02:08 1999
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 15472 invoked by uid 514); 4 Jun 1999 15:02:08 -0000
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 15469 invoked by uid 0); 4 Jun 1999 15:02:08 -0000
Date: 4 Jun 1999 15:02:08 -0000
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
However, it is ugly to see a lot of delivered to lines with the real user
address [EMAIL PROTECTED], and even [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in the envelope.
How can I set up the system, so that qmail does not put these lines in the
envelope, or only one of it, and that containing the virtual domain
address [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
Or,
is there a way, I can filter the incoming mail for a domain in the
control/locals and redirect the mail to another local user's mailbox,
or reject it with a no such user message, the same way, like in sendmail's
virtual user table feature?
Robert Varga
