qmail Digest 22 Jul 1999 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 705
Topics (messages 28009 through 28061):
Qmail, virtual domains, assign and .qmail files...
28009 by: "Stephen Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28013 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28015 by: "Stephen Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28016 by: "Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28027 by: "Stephen Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail problems
28010 by: "Tim Hunter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28011 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28014 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lorens Kockum)
28045 by: Todd Backman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28046 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28047 by: Todd Backman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28048 by: Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28049 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28054 by: Todd Backman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28061 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lorens Kockum)
Return-Path
28012 by: "Fred Lindberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
New vchkpw 3.4.3 and 3.4.4beta available
28017 by: Ken Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Disabling lines in assign
28018 by: Victor Tavares <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28019 by: Robbie Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28020 by: "Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"q" in "qmail" means ?
28021 by: Dave Kitabjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28022 by: Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28023 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28026 by: Ken Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28030 by: "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28060 by: torben fjerdingstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
something just ain't right.
28024 by: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28025 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28032 by: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28038 by: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Can qmail work withuot MX RR?
28028 by: "Alvaro Escobar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28031 by: "Petr Novotny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28033 by: "Alex Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28058 by: "Petr Novotny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
serialmail/autoTURN not working
28029 by: "Tom Furie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME and PGP
28034 by: Juan Carlos Castro y Castro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28037 by: Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28040 by: Juan Carlos Castro y Castro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28041 by: Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28044 by: Robbie Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Vanishing messages.
28035 by: Doug McClure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28042 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
smtp routing
28036 by: "Pieckiel, Kevin A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
anyone have a copy of the memphis rpm's?
28039 by: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
smtproutes - possible without DNS ?
28043 by: "Olivier M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bug in qmail-pop3d.c
28050 by: Aaron Nabil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28051 by: Stefan Paletta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28053 by: Aaron Nabil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
bug (?) in qmail-pop3d-1.03.diff
28052 by: Aaron Nabil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
qmail for AIX
28055 by: Rahmat Ara Bithi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28057 by: Todd at NM Technet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
28059 by: Rahmat Ara Bithi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Automated message
28056 by: Rahmat Ara Bithi <[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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Regards,
I am having terrible trouble getting qmail to
work for virtual domains. I have followed the advice
from one of the links on qmail.org, and used the
users/assign file to break up my site into domains.
This method seems fine for delivering to the
directories, however, when it gets there, I can't seem
to use a .qmail file to cause forwarding, or Maildir
formats..
Any idea what I could be doing wrong? Some
notes:
* the entire directory tree for delivery is owned
by the correct user/group. It is chmod 700,
except for the .qmail files which are 600.
* I am not sure what the difference between .qmail-user,
.qmail-default and .qmail is?
Anyone see any obvious gotchas?
Cheers,
-- Steve Casey | A cynic is a person who insists
| on seeing things as
URL: http://www.kallisti.co.uk | they are, not as they
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | ought to be.
"Stephen Casey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am having terrible trouble getting qmail to
>work for virtual domains. I have followed the advice
>from one of the links on qmail.org, and used the
>users/assign file to break up my site into domains.
What exactly did you put in users/assign?
> This method seems fine for delivering to the
>directories,
How do you know that?
>however, when it gets there, I can't seem
>to use a .qmail file to cause forwarding, or Maildir
>formats..
What .qmail have you created? What addresses did you send to? What
happened? What did qmail-send log?
> Any idea what I could be doing wrong?
There're about a zillion things, give or take a million, that could go
wrong. Without some specifics, we'd just be guessing.
>* I am not sure what the difference between .qmail-user,
> .qmail-default and .qmail is?
Mail to "user" goes to ~user/.qmail, if it exists, otherwise it's
delivered via the "defaultdelivery" specified on the qmail-start
command line.
Mail to "user-foo" goes to ~user/.qmail-foo, if it exists, otherwise it
goes to ~user/.qmail-default, if it exists, otherwise it goes to
~alias/.qmail-default, if it exists, otherwise it bounces.
-Dave
Being very specific:
defaultdelivery/rc
./Maildir/
control/rcpthosts
jobmagic.net
control/virtualdomains
jobmagic.net:jobmagic.net
users/assign
+jobmagic.net-:qmailpop:87:81:/var/qmail/users/spool/jobmagic.net:::
/var/qmail/users/spool/jobmagic.net/.qmail-default
&[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/var/qmail/users/spool/jobmagic.net/.qmail
&[EMAIL PROTECTED]
When I deliver to this address I get:
932567763.318108 new msg 44192
932567763.318117 info msg 44192: bytes 973 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp
6659 uid 81
932567763.355212 starting delivery 3: msg 44192 to local
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
932567763.355231 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
932567763.359144 delivery 3: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/
932567763.359163 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
Basically, it sems that /var/qmail/users/spool/jobmagic.net/.qmail is being
ignored and the default is being used?
Any ideas?
-- Steve Casey | A cynic is a person who insists
| on seeing things as
URL: http://www.kallisti.co.uk | they are, not as they
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | ought to be.
On Wed, 21 Jul 1999, Stephen Casey wrote:
> Being very specific:
>
> defaultdelivery/rc
> ./Maildir/
>
> control/rcpthosts
> jobmagic.net
>
> control/virtualdomains
> jobmagic.net:jobmagic.net
>
> users/assign
> +jobmagic.net-:qmailpop:87:81:/var/qmail/users/spool/jobmagic.net:::
>
> /var/qmail/users/spool/jobmagic.net/.qmail-default
> &[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> /var/qmail/users/spool/jobmagic.net/.qmail
> &[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> When I deliver to this address I get:
> 932567763.318108 new msg 44192
> 932567763.318117 info msg 44192: bytes 973 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp
> 6659 uid 81
> 932567763.355212 starting delivery 3: msg 44192 to local
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 932567763.355231 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20
> 932567763.359144 delivery 3: deferral: Unable_to_chdir_to_maildir._(#4.2.1)/
> 932567763.359163 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20
>
> Basically, it sems that /var/qmail/users/spool/jobmagic.net/.qmail is being
> ignored and the default is being used?
>
> Any ideas?
Yes, you have a "." in the real username. Change it to a "-" or anything
else and I'll bet it works.
>
> -- Steve Casey | A cynic is a person who insists
> | on seeing things as
> URL: http://www.kallisti.co.uk | they are, not as they
> E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | ought to be.
>
>
---------------------------------
Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Administrator
localconnect(sm)
http://www.localconnect.net/
The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/
One Monroeville Center, Suite 850
Monroeville, PA 15146
(412) 810-8888 Phone
(412) 810-8886 Fax
Problem solved!!
Thanks to those who mailed me some suggestions..
Basically, if you have a wildcard domain:
+domain.com-:user:UID:GID:/var/spool/dir:-::
You use a .qmail-default in the /var/spool/dir/
If you have
=domain.com-user:user:UID:GID:/var/spool/dir:::
You use a .qmail in the /var/spool/dir/
Only took me 24 hours to work that one out :)
Cheers,
-- Steve Casey, Technical | Address:Camberley House,
Director, www.Strategies ltd | 85 Highstreet,
Phone: +44 (01276) 684511 | Camberley, Surrey,
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GU15 3RB, England
Try giving qmail-send and ALRM signal, and watch the logs to see if they
might be getting deferred. Do you know if any messages are getting out? I
have never seen that many messages get "stuck" in the queue
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Backman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 7:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Qmail
Subject: RE: qmail problems
I am unsure about the reason for it's failure. I guess I was just lucky to
inherit the problem... ;^) There are no log files regarding this. The
files are readable. ex:
machine# more 143099
u0^@p15606^@[EMAIL PROTECTED]^@[EMAIL PROTECTED]^@
machine#
is in both intd and todo.
machine# ./qmail-qstat
messages in queue: 115248
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 549
when I run 'qmail-send' it just sits there and does not send any of the
files out...
I apologize for being clueless here but I have never dealt with qmail
before and this was dumped into my lap...
Thanks again.
- Todd
On Tue, 20 Jul 1999, Tim Hunter wrote:
> Taken from Life With qmail by Dave Sill
>
> D.3. Queue structure
> The file INTERNALS in the build directory discusses the details of
queueing
> more thoroughly.
>
> intd envelopes under construction by qmail-queue
> todo complete envelopes
>
> my guess is that qmail-queue broke a few times?
> any indication in your logs? are the files readable?
> More info please
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Todd Backman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 5:26 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: qmail problems
>
>
>
> Greetings,
>
> I have inherited a freebsd box running qmail...and I have never used qmail
> before. What I would like to know is:
>
> What are the functions of the 'todo' and 'intd' directories? There are
> tons of msgs in them and qmail does not seem to be processing them. I have
> moved the files out of the directory (backed them up) and moved a small
> amt. of them back in to see if the dirs. were just overloaded, restarted
> qmail and attempted to run qmail-send with no luck. If someone could hit
> me with the clue stick it would be greatly appreciated... ;^)
>
> After looking at the qmail archives I am unable to resolve this issue.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> - Todd
>
Todd Backman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>machine# ./qmail-qstat
>messages in queue: 115248
>messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 549
>
>when I run 'qmail-send' it just sits there and does not send any of the
>files out...
What does qmail-qread say? What does qmail-send log?
>I apologize for being clueless here but I have never dealt with qmail
>before and this was dumped into my lap...
That's not the best way to be introduced to a new system. We'll help
you through it, though. In your spare time, scan "Life with qmail":
http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html
-Dave
On the qmail list [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>What are the functions of the 'todo' and 'intd' directories? There are
>tons of msgs in them and qmail does not seem to be processing them. I have
>moved the files out of the directory (backed them up) and moved a small
>amt. of them back in to see if the dirs. were just overloaded, restarted
Off the cuff, won't that moving around create problems with the
inode->filename mapping?
Once that's resolved, maybe the reason the mails didn't go out
was the trigger? You should have
# ls -lA ${QMAIL}/queue/lock/
-rw------- 1 qmails qmail 0 Mar 19 1998 sendmutex
-rw-r--r-- 1 qmailr qmail 1024 Jul 13 11:03 tcpto
prw--w--w- 1 qmails qmail 0 Jul 21 15:32 trigger|
The special file there has an annoying habit of being corrupted
(not that it's ever happened to me, but it seems to be a
recurrent problem on this list).
IMO, the qmail queue is very fragile when people with root start
poking around in it (and not otherwise).
On 21 Jul 1999, Lorens Kockum wrote:
> On the qmail list [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >What are the functions of the 'todo' and 'intd' directories? There are
> >tons of msgs in them and qmail does not seem to be processing them. I have
> >moved the files out of the directory (backed them up) and moved a small
> >amt. of them back in to see if the dirs. were just overloaded, restarted
>
> Off the cuff, won't that moving around create problems with the
> inode->filename mapping?
Do not know...
>
> Once that's resolved, maybe the reason the mails didn't go out
> was the trigger? You should have
>
> # ls -lA ${QMAIL}/queue/lock/
> -rw------- 1 qmails qmail 0 Mar 19 1998 sendmutex
> -rw-r--r-- 1 qmailr qmail 1024 Jul 13 11:03 tcpto
> prw--w--w- 1 qmails qmail 0 Jul 21 15:32 trigger|
elvis# ls -la /var/qmail/queue/lock/
total 3
drwxr-x--- 2 qmailq qmail 512 Jul 20 16:17 .
drwxr-x--- 13 qmailq qmail 512 Jul 20 16:17 ..
-rw------- 1 qmails qmail 0 Jul 17 02:54 sendmutex
-rw-r--r-- 1 qmailr qmail 1024 Jul 20 16:17 tcpto
prw--w--w- 1 qmails qmail 0 Jul 20 16:17 trigger
>
> The special file there has an annoying habit of being corrupted
> (not that it's ever happened to me, but it seems to be a
> recurrent problem on this list).
>
> IMO, the qmail queue is very fragile when people with root start
> poking around in it (and not otherwise).
>
Thanks.
- Todd
=========================================================================
Todd Backman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "there are two major products
UNIX Systems Administrator that came out of berkeley
Flying Crocodile Inc. lsd and unix.
Seattle, WA we don't believe this to be
"Chaos is a good teacher..." a coincidence." j.s.anderson
=========================================================================
Todd Backman writes:
> On 21 Jul 1999, Lorens Kockum wrote:
>
> > On the qmail list [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > >What are the functions of the 'todo' and 'intd' directories? There are
> > >tons of msgs in them and qmail does not seem to be processing them. I have
> > >moved the files out of the directory (backed them up) and moved a small
> > >amt. of them back in to see if the dirs. were just overloaded, restarted
> >
> > Off the cuff, won't that moving around create problems with the
> > inode->filename mapping?
>
> Do not know...
As long as you ONLY move/rename stuff around, inodes do not change.
--
Sam
How would I go about giving qmail-send and ALRM signal?
On Wed, 21 Jul 1999, Tim Hunter wrote:
> Try giving qmail-send and ALRM signal, and watch the logs to see if they
> might be getting deferred. Do you know if any messages are getting out? I
> have never seen that many messages get "stuck" in the queue
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Todd Backman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 7:08 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Qmail
> Subject: RE: qmail problems
>
>
>
> I am unsure about the reason for it's failure. I guess I was just lucky to
> inherit the problem... ;^) There are no log files regarding this. The
> files are readable. ex:
>
> machine# more 143099
> u0^@p15606^@[EMAIL PROTECTED]^@[EMAIL PROTECTED]^@
> machine#
>
> is in both intd and todo.
>
> machine# ./qmail-qstat
> messages in queue: 115248
> messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 549
>
> when I run 'qmail-send' it just sits there and does not send any of the
> files out...
>
> I apologize for being clueless here but I have never dealt with qmail
> before and this was dumped into my lap...
>
> Thanks again.
>
> - Todd
>
> On Tue, 20 Jul 1999, Tim Hunter wrote:
>
> > Taken from Life With qmail by Dave Sill
> >
> > D.3. Queue structure
> > The file INTERNALS in the build directory discusses the details of
> queueing
> > more thoroughly.
> >
> > intd envelopes under construction by qmail-queue
> > todo complete envelopes
> >
> > my guess is that qmail-queue broke a few times?
> > any indication in your logs? are the files readable?
> > More info please
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Todd Backman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 5:26 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: qmail problems
> >
> >
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I have inherited a freebsd box running qmail...and I have never used qmail
> > before. What I would like to know is:
> >
> > What are the functions of the 'todo' and 'intd' directories? There are
> > tons of msgs in them and qmail does not seem to be processing them. I have
> > moved the files out of the directory (backed them up) and moved a small
> > amt. of them back in to see if the dirs. were just overloaded, restarted
> > qmail and attempted to run qmail-send with no luck. If someone could hit
> > me with the clue stick it would be greatly appreciated... ;^)
> >
> > After looking at the qmail archives I am unable to resolve this issue.
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> > - Todd
> >
>
Thanks.
- Todd
=========================================================================
Todd Backman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "there are two major products
UNIX Systems Administrator that came out of berkeley
Flying Crocodile Inc. lsd and unix.
Seattle, WA we don't believe this to be
"Chaos is a good teacher..." a coincidence." j.s.anderson
=========================================================================
On 22-Jul-99 Todd Backman wrote:
>
> How would I go about giving qmail-send and ALRM signal?
man kill(1)
Vince.
>
>
> On Wed, 21 Jul 1999, Tim Hunter wrote:
>
>> Try giving qmail-send and ALRM signal, and watch the logs to see if they
>> might be getting deferred. Do you know if any messages are getting out? I
>> have never seen that many messages get "stuck" in the queue
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Todd Backman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 7:08 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Cc: Qmail
>> Subject: RE: qmail problems
>>
>>
>>
>> I am unsure about the reason for it's failure. I guess I was just lucky to
>> inherit the problem... ;^) There are no log files regarding this. The
>> files are readable. ex:
>>
>> machine# more 143099
>> u0^@p15606^@[EMAIL PROTECTED]^@[EMAIL PROTECTED]^@
>> machine#
>>
>> is in both intd and todo.
>>
>> machine# ./qmail-qstat
>> messages in queue: 115248
>> messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 549
>>
>> when I run 'qmail-send' it just sits there and does not send any of the
>> files out...
>>
>> I apologize for being clueless here but I have never dealt with qmail
>> before and this was dumped into my lap...
>>
>> Thanks again.
>>
>> - Todd
>>
>> On Tue, 20 Jul 1999, Tim Hunter wrote:
>>
>> > Taken from Life With qmail by Dave Sill
>> >
>> > D.3. Queue structure
>> > The file INTERNALS in the build directory discusses the details of
>> queueing
>> > more thoroughly.
>> >
>> > intd envelopes under construction by qmail-queue
>> > todo complete envelopes
>> >
>> > my guess is that qmail-queue broke a few times?
>> > any indication in your logs? are the files readable?
>> > More info please
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Todd Backman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 5:26 PM
>> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > Subject: qmail problems
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Greetings,
>> >
>> > I have inherited a freebsd box running qmail...and I have never used qmail
>> > before. What I would like to know is:
>> >
>> > What are the functions of the 'todo' and 'intd' directories? There are
>> > tons of msgs in them and qmail does not seem to be processing them. I have
>> > moved the files out of the directory (backed them up) and moved a small
>> > amt. of them back in to see if the dirs. were just overloaded, restarted
>> > qmail and attempted to run qmail-send with no luck. If someone could hit
>> > me with the clue stick it would be greatly appreciated... ;^)
>> >
>> > After looking at the qmail archives I am unable to resolve this issue.
>> >
>> > Thanks in advance.
>> >
>> > - Todd
>> >
>>
>
> Thanks.
>
> - Todd
>
> =========================================================================
> Todd Backman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "there are two major products
> UNIX Systems Administrator that came out of berkeley
> Flying Crocodile Inc. lsd and unix.
> Seattle, WA we don't believe this to be
> "Chaos is a good teacher..." a coincidence." j.s.anderson
> =========================================================================
>
--
==========================================================================
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 writes:
>
> On 22-Jul-99 Todd Backman wrote:
> >
> > How would I go about giving qmail-send and ALRM signal?
>
> man kill(1)
[ snip ]
=========================================================================
> > Todd Backman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "there are two major products
> > UNIX Systems Administrator that came out of berkeley
> > Flying Crocodile Inc. lsd and unix.
> > Seattle, WA we don't believe this to be
#include <stdflame.h>
--
Sam
Thanks for the url btw...
On Wed, 21 Jul 1999, Dave Sill wrote:
> Todd Backman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >machine# ./qmail-qstat
> >messages in queue: 115248
> >messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 549
> >
> >when I run 'qmail-send' it just sits there and does not send any of the
> >files out...
>
> What does qmail-qread say? What does qmail-send log?
I get nothing back at all from them...
The startup script is as follows:
#!/bin/sh
. /usr/local/etc/rc.d/fci.conf
start_only
echo -n 'qmail: '
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -R -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -c100 -u81 -g82 0 smtp
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
when I envoke the script the only thing that starts is:
15238 alias 2 0 792K 476K accept 0:00 0.00% 0.00% tcpserver
I do not see any qmail* related process' start up as stated on you web
page:
qmail-send running as user qmails
qmail-clean running as user qmailq
qmail-rspawn running as user qmailr
qmail-lspawn running as user root
It does not seem that qmail is being started at all?
Thanks again Dave.
- Todd
On the qmail list [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On 21 Jul 1999, Lorens Kockum wrote:
>> On the qmail list [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >What are the functions of the 'todo' and 'intd' directories? There are
>> >tons of msgs in them and qmail does not seem to be processing them. I have
>> >moved the files out of the directory (backed them up) and moved a small
>> >amt. of them back in to see if the dirs. were just overloaded, restarted
>>
>> Off the cuff, won't that moving around create problems with the
>> inode->filename mapping?
As Sam says, as long as it's mv and not cp or tar, you're OK.
>elvis# ls -la /var/qmail/queue/lock/
>total 3
>drwxr-x--- 2 qmailq qmail 512 Jul 20 16:17 .
>drwxr-x--- 13 qmailq qmail 512 Jul 20 16:17 ..
>-rw------- 1 qmails qmail 0 Jul 17 02:54 sendmutex
>-rw-r--r-- 1 qmailr qmail 1024 Jul 20 16:17 tcpto
>prw--w--w- 1 qmails qmail 0 Jul 20 16:17 trigger
Hmph. I have
drwxr-x--- 2 qmailq qmail 1024 Mar 9 1998 ./
drwxr-x--- 11 qmailq qmail 1024 Feb 6 1998 ../
-rw------- 1 qmails qmail 0 Mar 19 1998 sendmutex
-rw-r--r-- 1 qmailr qmail 1024 Jul 13 11:03 tcpto
prw--w--w- 1 qmails qmail 0 Jul 22 11:28 trigger|
Trigger last modified last time it was triggered, but yours is
last modified when the dir was created.
Certainly seems that qmail is not started, whatever the reason.
On Tue, 20 Jul 1999 11:35:01 -0400, David Villeger wrote:
>qmail-inject -n definitely produces a Return-Path field.
qmail-inject by default (-N) queues messages to the mail system. As
such it _does not_ add a "return-path" header. With the -n switch you
ask it to print a message. This is a "final delivery", so it adds the
header. Trust DJB programming to dot the i's and cross the t ;-)
man qmail-inject [...]:
-N (Default.) Feed the resulting message to qmail-
queue.
-n Print the message rather than feeding it to qmail-
queue.
[...]
-Sincerely, Fred
(Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA)
New versions of vchkpw are available at
http://www.inter7.com/vchkpw/
vchkpw is a single uid/gid package for virtual domains and
for pop users for domains in ~control/locals. It works with
Sqwebmail and QmailAdmin. All are under the GPL license.
Changes and code are available on the web site.
They include:
New features in 3.4.3:
- config ; make ; make install format. Uses the autoconf gnu tools
- vaddomain, vdeldomain, vadduser, vdeluser re-written in C.
- Automatically detects if shadow passwords are on the machine
- Automatically figures out how to kill -HUP qmail-send via the proper
ps
command
- New install documentation.
- vaddomain and vadduser now accept the password on the command line.
- New vpasswd program to change a users password.
- New vadduser/vdeluser command to allow creation of pop accounts for
the
domains in /var/qmail/control/locals, so they don't have to be in
/etc/passwd. Pop name is user instead of user%domain for the
virtualdomain users.
- hard quota default set to 50meg per pop account
New features in 3.4.4 beta:
- cleaned up file permissions on the distribution files.
- added default mode on users/assign file to read/write owner, read
group
read other.
- added -a switch for vpasswd to set APOP for that user.
- added file locking for the open relay after pop authentication.
heavily
popped sites were getting errors when two pop authenications tried to
rebuild the /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb file at the same time.
- added a configuration option --enable-tcpserver-file to set the
default
/etc/tcp.smtp file to something different.
- Added -a switch to vadddomain. This will create the postmaster account
with APOP enabled
- Added -a switch to vaddduser. This creates the user account with APOP
enabled
--
Ken Jones
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/ - web based qmail adminstration
Hi all.
Since there is no comment character in the assign file, can I disable a
domain/user line in the assign file by moving it after the "." at the end
of the file?
--vt
delete the line. If you need to maintain a copy put it in a different file
like assign.bak and use a number sign so you'll know you deleted it.
At 11:17 PM 7/20/99 , you wrote:
>Hi all.
>
>Since there is no comment character in the assign file, can I disable a
>domain/user line in the assign file by moving it after the "." at the end
>of the file?
>
>--vt
>
>
>
______________________
NovaMetrix Development
Robbie Walker, AMWL
P.O. Box 635 or 910-653-4006
106-B S. Main St 800-773-5647
Tabor City, NC 28463 910-653-2052 FAX
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.2
iQA/AwUBN5XmyDrJV5JQYcnnEQJTTwCggQsgWJFEOVSnTN5/iQTMog1xElIAniuS
Y4++2PeOgdw062FRQdDSwB1A
=mckL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Tue, 20 Jul 1999, Victor Tavares wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> Since there is no comment character in the assign file, can I disable a
> domain/user line in the assign file by moving it after the "." at the end
> of the file?
>
> --vt
No. The last line of user/assign must be a "." by itself. To disable a
line you must remove it entirely.
---------------------------------
Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Administrator
localconnect(sm)
http://www.localconnect.net/
The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/
One Monroeville Center, Suite 850
Monroeville, PA 15146
(412) 810-8888 Phone
(412) 810-8886 Fax
I ask this question with great trepidation. Either I'm the only one brave
enough to ask, or I'm the only one stupid enough to have to ask, but...
What does the "q" in "qmail" mean?
Dave
p.s. Since I'm going to get flamed for stupidity, let me ask another
question:
If LWQ insists that the official name is "qmail", not "Qmail", why does the
logo start with "Q" on http://www.qmail.org/top.html?
Dave Kitabjian writes:
> If LWQ insists that the official name is "qmail", not "Qmail", why does the
> logo start with "Q" on http://www.qmail.org/top.html?
Probably for the same reason that the qmail book is going to use Qmail
when that word begins a sentence: because it looks ugly otherwise.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr sells OSI Certified(tm) Open Source Sware| 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!
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>What does the "q" in "qmail" mean?
Take your pick:
A) quality
B) quick
C) queue
D) quantum
E) all of the above
F) none of the above
G) nothing at all
>If LWQ insists that the official name is "qmail", not "Qmail", why does the
>logo start with "Q" on http://www.qmail.org/top.html?
Beats me. :-) None of the qmail logos have the DJB stamp of approval.
-Dave
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What does the "q" in "qmail" mean?
>
Well, since dan is a math proffessor. My bet would be on
queue, or queueing theory. The brits use of queue is all over math.
"Let's queue up for mail"
--
Ken Jones
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.inter7.com/qmailadmin/ - web based qmail adminstration
hmmm... great trepidation. You don't think there's anyone
on this list with an aggressive nature, do you?
Layered meaning:
In Hebrew, many words have layers of meaning, not simply
denotation vs. connotation, but actual layers of meaning.
For example the Hebrew word shamayim is often translated
as heaven or heavens or sky or skies. It is a dual word
(not singular or plural) relating it to the prevailing
Babylonian cosmogony of the time of 2 skies, the sky above
the horizon "freshwater" and the sky below the horizon
"bitterwater". (the word for water is mayim) Part of the
poetry present in Hebrew scriptures was a kind of word
play and referencing of the other-layer meanings, hence
the later reference to dividing the waters above from the
waters below.
I think in this sense qmail has multi-layered meanings.
There is q(uick)mail implying both the modern meaning
of quick, "fast", and older meanings of quick, "sure"
"able", as in "the quick youth"
Then, there is the sound reversal. Itamix makes a web browser
xitami (itamix backwards). Well qmail is a sound switch
for "mail queue"
As for spelling it Qmail, or qmail, or QMail, well, any
should do. It's hard enough dealing with the confusion of
html sent to non-html aware MUA's.
My vote for the punctuation would be QmaIl
meaning "Quick Installation may alter life"
capitals first, then small letters,
but I lived in California for a few years.
It would be nice if some consensus answer
gets around before people start passing
around some offensive interpretation.
Alex Miller
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Kitabjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 11:56 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: "q" in "qmail" means ?
>
>
>
> I ask this question with great trepidation. Either I'm the only
> one brave
> enough to ask, or I'm the only one stupid enough to have to ask, but...
>
> What does the "q" in "qmail" mean?
>
> Dave
>
> p.s. Since I'm going to get flamed for stupidity, let me ask another
> question:
>
> If LWQ insists that the official name is "qmail", not "Qmail",
> why does the
> logo start with "Q" on http://www.qmail.org/top.html?
>
On Wed, Jul 21, 1999 at 11:55:43AM -0400, Dave Kitabjian wrote:
>
> What does the "q" in "qmail" mean?
I vote for "quiet". It does it's job quietly, just like UNIX.
> If LWQ insists that the official name is "qmail", not "Qmail", why does the
> logo start with "Q" on http://www.qmail.org/top.html?
Since it's neither a unix command or a user name, it is not
sensite to case.
Upppercase filenames are often considered abusive, so I suppose
that's why the distribution spells qmail-1.03.tar.gz.
--
Med venlig hilsen / Regards
Netdriftgruppen / Network Management Group
UNI-C
Tlf./Phone +45 35 87 89 41 Mail: UNI-C
Fax. +45 35 87 89 90 Bygning 304
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DK-2800 Lyngby
I'm still having very poor performance with that mail list. Can someone
please explain to me why qmail doesn't fill the concurrent qmail remote
processes? I'm sitting here with 150,000 mails in the queue and
concurrent remote's are like a 3/75 or 4/75.
Also, can someone explain the preprocessed stage? This is my qmail-qstat:
messages in queue: 157489
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 121433
I need to start pumping this mail out fast.
-jeremy
http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------
Y2K. We're all gonna die.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm still having very poor performance with that mail list. Can someone
>please explain to me why qmail doesn't fill the concurrent qmail remote
>processes?
qmail-send can't spawn the qmail-remote/qmail-local jobs fast enough.
>I'm sitting here with 150,000 mails in the queue and
>concurrent remote's are like a 3/75 or 4/75.
What do top, vmstat, iostat, and the qmail-send logs tell you?
>Also, can someone explain the preprocessed stage?
See INTERNALS in the build directory.
>I need to start pumping this mail out fast.
Then you need to figure out what the problem is.
-Dave
Nothing is out of the ordinary according to any of those utilities.
-jeremy
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I'm still having very poor performance with that mail list. Can someone
> >please explain to me why qmail doesn't fill the concurrent qmail remote
> >processes?
>
> qmail-send can't spawn the qmail-remote/qmail-local jobs fast enough.
>
> >I'm sitting here with 150,000 mails in the queue and
> >concurrent remote's are like a 3/75 or 4/75.
>
> What do top, vmstat, iostat, and the qmail-send logs tell you?
>
> >Also, can someone explain the preprocessed stage?
>
> See INTERNALS in the build directory.
>
> >I need to start pumping this mail out fast.
>
> Then you need to figure out what the problem is.
>
> -Dave
>
http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------
Y2K. We're all gonna die.
So any other suggestions on what I can do to speed this thing up or should
I just go back to sendmail?
Another hint is that I'm using the Bruce Guentner rpm's. Is there
something with those rpm's that would cause a slow down?
-jeremy
>
> I'm still having very poor performance with that mail list. Can someone
> please explain to me why qmail doesn't fill the concurrent qmail remote
> processes? I'm sitting here with 150,000 mails in the queue and
> concurrent remote's are like a 3/75 or 4/75.
>
> Also, can someone explain the preprocessed stage? This is my qmail-qstat:
>
> messages in queue: 157489
> messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 121433
>
> I need to start pumping this mail out fast.
>
> -jeremy
>
>
> http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ---------------------------------------------
> Y2K. We're all gonna die.
>
>
http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------
Y2K. We're all gonna die.
|
I installed qmail in my Linux 2.0.36 machine.
qmail was configured as a relay only for my network.
The Linux machine does not have MX resource record in DNS server of my
domain.
Can qmail work properly without MX RR?
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> I installed qmail in my Linux 2.0.36 machine.
> qmail was configured as a relay only for my network.
> The Linux machine does not have MX resource record in DNS server of my
> domain. Can qmail work properly without MX RR?
If it has A, that's fine enough.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBN5YKtlMwP8g7qbw/EQJ4JwCg+G+qh0lXvJJ28QYOlY0oxvL3ZlQAn3Fi
53ZSTySpSIfK1kntVmfEs5yo
=ziNJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.antek.cz
PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F
-- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk.
[Tom Waits]
On that note, please correct me if what I am saying is incorrect.
An MX record is only necessary when an A record points to a machine
that has no mail handler, and the MX record then points to an A record
of a machine that does have a mail handler.
An MX record may not point to a C record even though it might
seem to make sense to do so, simply because DNS was designed
specifically prohibiting that.
Sending mail to a C record might seem to work, deceptively,
because you may have included the A record in localhosts.
For example,
if you have an A record stooges.com on a machine with QMail
and stooge.com is in the /var/control/localhosts file
then any mail sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], moe.stooges.com,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] will deliver if larry, moe, and curly
are users.
If there is a C record three.stooges.com that aliases
stooges.com (that's what a C record is) then
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] will also deliver because
like a c programming macro three.stooges.com
"becomes" stooges.com
The deceptive part of that is this.
If you want to route mail of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
to go to curly@localhost you must creat an alias
for shemp to route to curly and that will work for
all localhosts.
So there will be an effect that [EMAIL PROTECTED]
will also go to the user curly.
For explicit control of each domain, separately, you
want to use virtual domains, not localhost.
Each virtualhost should have it's own A record.
stooges.com has an A record
three.stooges.com has an A record
littlerascals.com has an A record
each is listed in rcpthosts
and a virtual domain map is put into virtualdomains
stooges.com:stooges
three.stooges.com:threestooges
littlerascals.com:littlerascals
This way, there is one user for each
virtual domain, and the .qmail routing
in each of those is very specific.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] can have a
routing and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
can properly bounce (since shemp
was never a little rascal)
Alex Miller
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Petr Novotny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 2:00 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Can qmail work withuot MX RR?
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> > I installed qmail in my Linux 2.0.36 machine.
> > qmail was configured as a relay only for my network.
> > The Linux machine does not have MX resource record in DNS server of my
> > domain. Can qmail work properly without MX RR?
>
> If it has A, that's fine enough.
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
> Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
>
> iQA/AwUBN5YKtlMwP8g7qbw/EQJ4JwCg+G+qh0lXvJJ28QYOlY0oxvL3ZlQAn3Fi
> 53ZSTySpSIfK1kntVmfEs5yo
> =ziNJ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> --
> Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.antek.cz
> PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F
> -- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk.
> [Tom Waits]
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> An MX record is only necessary when an A record points to a machine
> that has no mail handler, and the MX record then points to an A record of
> a machine that does have a mail handler.
That's the other way around (I mean the reasoning): Empty MX list
is considered a special case when A record should be tried. You
should try to have a MX (even pointing at yourself, like
mail IN A 11.111.111.1111
mail IN MX 5 mail
) because it saves one DNS lookup.
> An MX record may not point to a C record even though it might
> seem to make sense to do so, simply because DNS was designed
> specifically prohibiting that.
It doesn't make that much sense:
1. One additional lookup.
2. Mail sent to CNAME should be "canonicized" - ie. the CNAMEs
in the addresses should be resolved. If MX points to CNAME, you
don't know if it should be canonicized or not.
Plus, of course, RFC says against that.
> Sending mail to a C record might seem to work, deceptively,
> because you may have included the A record in localhosts.
???
You can send mail directly to a host which is only a CNAME (and
the address gets rewritten to what CNAME really points at). In fact,
if you have CNAME and MX for the same host, the MX is ignored
(and probably considered an error).
> For example,
> if you have an A record stooges.com on a machine with QMail
> and stooge.com is in the /var/control/localhosts file
> then any mail sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], moe.stooges.com,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] will deliver if larry, moe, and curly
> are users.
If you meant [EMAIL PROTECTED], yes.
> If there is a C record three.stooges.com that aliases
> stooges.com (that's what a C record is) then
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] will also deliver because
> like a c programming macro three.stooges.com
> "becomes" stooges.com
Yes - I like that explanation :-)
> The deceptive part of that is this.
>
> If you want to route mail of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> to go to curly@localhost you must creat an alias
> for shemp to route to curly and that will work for
> all localhosts.
>
> So there will be an effect that [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> will also go to the user curly.
>
> For explicit control of each domain, separately, you
> want to use virtual domains, not localhost.
Sure - all in "locals" are aliases for local host; ie. after you decided
the address in in aliases, only local part is used to route the mail. If
you want to use different handling for different domains, you want
virtual domains.
Caveat emptor: If three.stooges.com is a CNAME for stooges.com,
you are not too likely to receive a mail for
[EMAIL PROTECTED], since the CNAMEs should get
canonicized (rewritten), unless the other side is broken. If you want
virtual domain, you want MX pointing at you, not CNAME.
> Each virtualhost should have it's own A record.
> stooges.com has an A record
> three.stooges.com has an A record
> littlerascals.com has an A record
MX is enough. Although nothing prohibits it, you might (repeat:
might) have some problems with broken, brain-dead machines on
the other side that do a forward lookup, a reverse lookup, and then
seem surprised that they didn't get the original name. But hey,
yes, their behaviour would be broken.
> each is listed in rcpthosts
>
> and a virtual domain map is put into virtualdomains
> stooges.com:stooges
> three.stooges.com:threestooges
> littlerascals.com:littlerascals
>
> This way, there is one user for each
> virtual domain, and the .qmail routing
> in each of those is very specific.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] can have a
> routing and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> can properly bounce (since shemp
> was never a little rascal)
If I only knew what you're talking about - some TV show perhaps?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBN5bPEFMwP8g7qbw/EQLaPQCgguzZnoqORbewL2dTBP9/QjT1og0Aniqe
LPgVk8BL7n5GRwW3sbbK5+T8
=re9u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Petr Novotny, ANTEK CS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.antek.cz
PGP key ID: 0x3BA9BC3F
-- Don't you know there ain't no devil there's just God when he's drunk.
[Tom Waits]
> As far as we know, you followed the instruction correctly. And as far
> as we know, when one does that, the software works. So, as far as we
> know, there's no problem. :-)
>
> Perhaps if you showed us what you actually did, we could tell you if
> it was right.
>
> What *exactly* did you do to enable AutoTURN?
Okay,
qmail alone - passes deliver and receive tests fine.
Add ucspi-tcp, run qmail-smtpd through tcpserver - still passes deliver and
receive tests.
Add serialmail, follow the instructions in AUTOTURN.
Section 3 - if I use sh -c..., I cannot connect to port 25 on the mail
server. Using csh -c, I can connect to port 25.
Send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], message goes into
/var/qmail/autoturn/customers.ip/new
Run maildirsmtp command to process test.domain queue e.g. maildirsmtp
1.2.3.4 autoturn-1.2.3.4- 1.2.3.4 AutoTURN, mail is processed and arrives at
ms.test.domain
Send mail from test.domain using qmail.server as relay, mail arrives at
destination, but delivery from qmail.server to ms.test.domain is not
triggered.
At this point the log shows -
Jul 21 16:03:05 post smtpd: 932572985.960112 tcpserver: status: 1/40
Jul 21 16:03:05 post smtpd: 932572985.962587 tcpserver: pid 299 from
1.2.3.4
Jul 21 16:03:05 post smtpd: 932572985.977107 tcpserver: ok 299
qmail.server:1.2.3.3:25 ms.test.domain:1.2.3.4::2162
Jul 21 16:03:06 post smtpd: 932572986.390938 tcpserver: end 299 status
65280
Jul 21 16:03:06 post smtpd: 932572986.391717 tcpserver: status: 0/40
(The above IP's and names are not the actual values on the system)
rc.local looks like -
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -u 503 -g 502 0 smtp csh -c '
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
cd /var/qmail/autoturn
exec /usr/local/bin/setlock -nx $TCPREMOTEIP/seriallock \
/usr/local/bin/maildirsmtp $TCPREMOTEIP autoturn-$TCPREMOTEIP-
$TCPREMOTEIP AutoTURN
' 2>&1 | /var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
csh -cf '/var/qmail/rc &'
I have tried /var/qmail/rc both before and after the tcpserver command with
no apparent difference.
Cheers,
Tom
What's the correct MIME type and file suffix for encrypted PGP text, i
mean, the ones which begin with, "-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----"? I'm
toying with the idea of dealing with encrypting messages directly
through qmail. Don't ask too much. It's a cockamamie idea still in its
embryonary stages.
begin:vcard
n:Castro;Juan
tel;work:540-9100 Ramal 46
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.appi.com.br/jcastro
org:APPI Inform�tica;Desenvolvimento
adr:;;Av. Ataulfo de Paiva, 135/1410 - Leblon;Rio de Janeiro;RJ;22499-900;Brasil
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Consultor
note;quoted-printable:One man alone cannot fight the future. USE LINUX!=0D=0A=0D=0A -- The X Racer=0D=0A=0D=0APGP Key ID 0xAAE4050C=0D=0A
fn:Juan Carlos Castro y Castro
end:vcard
See rfc 2015 for how to have encrypted/signed MIME parts.
You might want to take a look at the mutt MUA. It works with PGP to
produce signed and/or encrypted messages.
For example this message is signed, and you can take a look at the raw
headers to get some idea of how things are done.
On Wed, Jul 21, 1999 at 03:26:38PM -0300,
Juan Carlos Castro y Castro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What's the correct MIME type and file suffix for encrypted PGP text, i
> mean, the ones which begin with, "-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----"? I'm
> toying with the idea of dealing with encrypting messages directly
> through qmail. Don't ask too much. It's a cockamamie idea still in its
> embryonary stages.
Content-Description: Card for Juan Carlos Castro y Castro
PGP signature
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> See rfc 2015 for how to have encrypted/signed MIME parts.
Ahhh, Now I'm starting to get the picture. BTW, is it my paranoia setting
going above the acceptable level or do I detect political reasons for Netscape
and MS not being too terribly in a hurry to make their MUAs operate seamlessly
with PGP/MIME?
Some time ago, I received a PGP encrypted message which followed that standard
(I didn't know that at the time). I eventually saved the
"application/octet-stream" part to a file with a ".pgp" extension and opened
it thru PGP. It'd be nice if the relevant MIME part could have a file name and
extension, preferrably ".asc" so it could be immediately opened by the Windows
version of PGP. From what I read in RFC2015 there's no problem with it.
Please people stop me if the conversation gets TOO offtopic.
> You might want to take a look at the mutt MUA. It works with PGP to
> produce signed and/or encrypted messages.
I have to support the Microsoft world here at the office. Mutt is Unix-only.
Drats. :(
> For example this message is signed, and you can take a look at the raw
> headers to get some idea of how things are done.
begin:vcard
n:Castro;Juan
tel;work:540-9100 Ramal 46
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.appi.com.br/jcastro
org:APPI Inform�tica;Desenvolvimento
adr:;;Av. Ataulfo de Paiva, 135/1410 - Leblon;Rio de Janeiro;RJ;22499-900;Brasil
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Consultor
note;quoted-printable:One man alone cannot fight the future. USE LINUX!=0D=0A=0D=0A -- The X Racer=0D=0A=0D=0APGP Key ID 0xAAE4050C=0D=0A
fn:Juan Carlos Castro y Castro
end:vcard
On Wed, Jul 21, 1999 at 05:57:51PM -0300,
Juan Carlos Castro y Castro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>
> > See rfc 2015 for how to have encrypted/signed MIME parts.
>
> Ahhh, Now I'm starting to get the picture. BTW, is it my paranoia setting
> going above the acceptable level or do I detect political reasons for Netscape
> and MS not being too terribly in a hurry to make their MUAs operate seamlessly
> with PGP/MIME?
Their is an alternate standard called S/MIME that uses hierarchical key
certification; though anybody can become their own certification authority.
Eudora Pro (I don't know about lite...) works well with the PGP/MIME
messages, the only problem (In my opinion) is that the message shows up as
an icon attachment and you have to click it to read it. PGP does
automatically check the signer for authenticity when you click it, so maybe
that's the reason. I'd rather have the program list the message and allow
me to check for authenticity manually if I want to.
Then again, maybe it's necessary to manually open encrypted messages in
this way (so you can enter your passphrase), and that's why you have to do
the same thing for signed messages.
You also have the option of just including the PGP generated text in the
body of the message, like this one, that way if the message is just signed,
the message is cleartext.
At 04:57 PM 7/21/99 , you wrote:
>Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>
>> See rfc 2015 for how to have encrypted/signed MIME parts.
>
>Ahhh, Now I'm starting to get the picture. BTW, is it my paranoia setting
>going above the acceptable level or do I detect political reasons for Netscape
>and MS not being too terribly in a hurry to make their MUAs operate seamlessly
>with PGP/MIME?
>
>Some time ago, I received a PGP encrypted message which followed that standard
>(I didn't know that at the time). I eventually saved the
>"application/octet-stream" part to a file with a ".pgp" extension and opened
>it thru PGP. It'd be nice if the relevant MIME part could have a file name and
>extension, preferrably ".asc" so it could be immediately opened by the Windows
>version of PGP. From what I read in RFC2015 there's no problem with it.
>
>Please people stop me if the conversation gets TOO offtopic.
>
>> You might want to take a look at the mutt MUA. It works with PGP to
>> produce signed and/or encrypted messages.
>
>I have to support the Microsoft world here at the office. Mutt is Unix-only.
>Drats. :(
>
>> For example this message is signed, and you can take a look at the raw
>> headers to get some idea of how things are done.
>
______________________
NovaMetrix Development
Robbie Walker, AMWL
P.O. Box 635 or 910-653-4006
106-B S. Main St 800-773-5647
Tabor City, NC 28463 910-653-2052 FAX
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.2
iQA/AwUBN5ZMMjrJV5JQYcnnEQJMKQCgvY41sed/7bepIpTHtSBP/KgeZsYAn0LT
ok6GJH/U66CHE/zkNbE42zMN
=4Tg1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
We are using Maildir over NFS on our qmail server. Sometimes when a message
is sent to a user, the message appears in new/ as it should but cannot be
retrieved by POP-3. It appears to get "dislodged" when another message is
sent. Any ideas?
-doug
Doug McClure writes:
> We are using Maildir over NFS on our qmail server. Sometimes when a message
> is sent to a user, the message appears in new/ as it should but cannot be
> retrieved by POP-3. It appears to get "dislodged" when another message is
> sent. Any ideas?
Depending on the POP-3 and other software you use, this could be a problem
due to clocks on your server and client being out of whack. Make sure that
all your machines are running NTP.
--
Sam
Hi,
Machine names and domain names are ficticious for simplicity. Topology
description is accurate, however.
I can't seem to figure out how to get my mail routing exactly as I want
it. I have 50 or so computers at mysite.org. We are behind a firewall
with a dedicated link to our HQ in another city. All mail generated by
computers at mysite.org are routed through my mail server
mail.mysite.org. If generated mail is not local (not to a mysite.org
address or machine.mysite.org address where machine is any machine
name), I want to route it through mailhost.hq.net. This can be done by
adding :mailhost.hq.net in smtproutes.
Here's where I have trouble:
I want mail addressed to pc1.mysite.org, pc2.mysite.org, and
pc3.mysite.org to be routed to those machines (they have qmail
installed). Mail to ANY OTHER MACHINE at mysite.org should be delivered
locally to mail.mysite.org no matter what the machine name is, even if
that machine doesn't exist. Of course, a valid user must be specified
or the mail will bounce, but that's not relevent to my question. How
can I set this up? All mail to any machine at mysite.org should be
delievered to mail.mysite.org unless it's sent to pc1.mysite.org,
pc2.mysite.org, or pc3.mysite.org, in which case mail is then routed to
those machines.
Thanks for your help.
Kevin A. Pieckiel
I'd like to try the memphis rpm's as opposed to Bruce's, but the server
appears to be down. Anyone have a mirror?
Thanks
-jeremy
Wired smtproutes problem.
HOST1 = SCO Unix with qmail and a few scripts that are sending
emails to the realworld via a relay. No dns access, subnet.
IP = 192.168.0.50
In /var/qmail/control/smtproutes, I have :
:[192.168.0.10]
HOST2 = linux server, with normal qmail configuration, allowing
relaying for 192.*. World acces. Should act as relay.
IP = 192.168.0.10
Now, when I try to send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the Host1, I get this
in syslog :
Jul 21 21:38:50 qmail qmail: 932593130.640000 new msg 50584
Jul 21 21:38:50 qmail qmail: 932593130.640000 info msg 50584: bytes 265 from
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 840 uid 0
Jul 21 21:38:50 qmail qmail: 932593130.840000 starting delivery 13: msg 50584 to
remote [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jul 21 21:38:50 qmail qmail: 932593130.840000 status: local 0/10 remote 11/20
and a qmail-remote is started :
qmailr 834 821 0 23:38:24 ttyp0 00:00:00 qmail-remote 212.28.128.193
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
but then, __ nothing __. It simply hangs.
There is a connexion made to the relay, because in the log of Host2,I see :
Jul 21 23:39:05 webima smtpd: 932593145.632655 tcpserver: status: 13/40
Jul 21 23:39:05 webima smtpd: 932593145.640848 tcpserver: pid 3890 from 192.168.0.90
Jul 21 23:39:05 webima smtpd: 932593145.699765 tcpserver: ok 3890 :192.168.0.10:25
:192.168.0.90::1082
I would be really happy to get some hints on this point.
I made everything I could following manual and faq, but well, it
still hangs, and it must work for tomorrow :(
Olivier
Caveat(s): I haven't tested this, in fact I don't even know if
the bug exists in the distributed version. I'm running a patched
version, purhaps that's the only one that has the problem.
But it seems likely the the distributed version does as well, so
if someone could test it I'd appreciate it.
According to rfc-1939 ...
RETR msg
Arguments:
a message-number (required) which may NOT refer to a
message marked as deleted
Restrictions:
may only be given in the TRANSACTION state
Discussion:
If the POP3 server issues a positive response, then the
response given is multi-line. After the initial +OK, the
POP3 server sends the message corresponding to the given
message-number, being careful to byte-stuff the termination
character (as with all multi-line responses).
Possible Responses:
+OK message follows
-ERR no such message
Examples:
C: RETR 1
S: +OK 120 octets
S: <the POP3 server sends the entire message here>
S: .
Qmail does...
Examples:
C: RETR 1
S: +OK 120 octets
S: <the POP3 server sends the entire message here>
S: \r\n
S: .
The same thing happens with the TOP command.
Here a proposed, untested fix. Note that if the for loop (not
visible below) ever does output anything, it is always terminated
with a \r\n. (You can just see the "put" in the patch) It should
therefore always be safe to just output .\r\n to terminate
the message.
*** ../../dist/qmail-1.03/qmail-pop3d.c Mon Jun 15 03:53:16 1998
--- /tmp/qmail-pop3d.c Wed Jul 21 19:24:26 1999
***************
*** 105,111 ****
put("\r\n",2);
if (!match) break;
}
! put("\r\n.\r\n",5);
flush();
}
--- 105,111 ----
put("\r\n",2);
if (!match) break;
}
! put(".\r\n",3);
flush();
}
--
Aaron Nabil
Aaron Nabil wrote/schrieb/scribsit:
> Examples:
> C: RETR 1
> S: +OK 120 octets
> S: <the POP3 server sends the entire message here>
> S: .
>
> Qmail does...
>
> Examples:
> C: RETR 1
> S: +OK 120 octets
> S: <the POP3 server sends the entire message here>
> S: \r\n
> S: .
From_ CHANGES:
19960818 change: qmail-pop3d now appends an extra blank line to every
message, for compatibility with popper. some clients can't
deal with the right thing, unfortunately. tnx FPL.
Stefan
Stefan Paletta writes...
>Aaron Nabil wrote/schrieb/scribsit:
>> Examples:
>> C: RETR 1
>> S: +OK 120 octets
>> S: <the POP3 server sends the entire message here>
>> S: .
>>
>> Qmail does...
>>
>> Examples:
>> C: RETR 1
>> S: +OK 120 octets
>> S: <the POP3 server sends the entire message here>
>> S: \r\n
>> S: .
>
>From_ CHANGES:
>19960818 change: qmail-pop3d now appends an extra blank line to every
> message, for compatibility with popper. some clients can't
> deal with the right thing, unfortunately. tnx FPL.
First thing I tested what seeing what cucipop does, and it doesn't add
the extra line. Considering how widely used cucipop is, I figgured that
would be a good indicator if this was a RFC-vs-Practice issue.
But thanks, lesson learned. I'll check the CHANGES next time, and
the list archives as well.
--
Aaron Nabil
There seems to be a small problem in the UIDL/Status feature patch
qmail-pop3d-1.03.diff. The problem is that when using the TOP
command, it chops everything off following the added X-UIDL line.
Here is a suggested patch (also includes the extra /r/n patch) (note
"suggested", for example I couldn't figgure out what the
str_diffn(line.s, "-----", 5) was supposed to be doing (yes, looks
like a part separater, but that would only be one _possible_ sep of
an infinite number (and no, it's not RFC-934, that would only be
one dash) so I whacked it out. I guess "--" would make more sense
if he really did intend it to detect a part sepr. Anyway, I'll dig up
the authors and drop them a note, maybe they can tell me.
*** /usr/staff/nabil/qmail-pop3d.c Sun Jun 27 09:07:28 1999
--- qmail-pop3d.c Wed Jul 21 19:40:02 1999
***************
*** 123,134 ****
if (!match && !line.len) break;
if (match) --line.len; /* no way to pass this info over POP */
if (limit) if (!inheaders) if (!--limit) break;
! if (!line.len || !str_diffn(line.s, "Content-Type: ", 14) || !str_diffn(line.s,
"-----", 5) )
{
/* add our status notification here... */
#if defined(USE_STATUS_HEADER) || defined(USE_XUIDL_HEADER)
- if (!extradone && (inheaders || !str_diffn(line.s, "Content-Type: ", 14) ||
!str_diffn(line.s, "-----", 5) ))
- {
#ifdef USE_STATUS_HEADER
if (m[i].flagread)
put("Status: RO\r\n",12);
--- 123,132 ----
if (!match && !line.len) break;
if (match) --line.len; /* no way to pass this info over POP */
if (limit) if (!inheaders) if (!--limit) break;
! if (inheaders && !extradone && (!line.len || !str_diffn(line.s, "Content-Type:
", 14)))
{
/* add our status notification here... */
#if defined(USE_STATUS_HEADER) || defined(USE_XUIDL_HEADER)
#ifdef USE_STATUS_HEADER
if (m[i].flagread)
put("Status: RO\r\n",12);
***************
*** 141,150 ****
put("\r\n",2);
#endif
extradone = 1;
- }
#endif
- inheaders = 0;
}
else
if (line.s[0] == '.')
put(".",1);
--- 139,148 ----
put("\r\n",2);
#endif
extradone = 1;
#endif
}
+ if (!line.len)
+ inheaders = 0;
else
if (line.s[0] == '.')
put(".",1);
***************
*** 152,158 ****
put("\r\n",2);
if (!match) break;
}
! put("\r\n.\r\n",5);
flush();
}
--- 150,156 ----
put("\r\n",2);
if (!match) break;
}
! put(".\r\n",3);
flush();
}
--
Aaron Nabil
Is there any version of qmail for AIX?
Bithi
bithi,
qmail compiles, installs and runs easily on aix (we use it on 4.2.1 and
have used it on 4.1.5).
todd underwood
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, Rahmat Ara Bithi wrote:
> Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 11:27:33 -0600 (GMT+6)
> From: Rahmat Ara Bithi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: qmail for AIX
>
>
> Is there any version of qmail for AIX?
>
> Bithi
>
>
Todd,
That means qmail-1.03.tar.gz, which I got from the
site www.qmail.org can be used for AIX.
bithi
On 22 Jul 1999, Todd at NM Technet wrote:
> bithi,
>
> qmail compiles, installs and runs easily on aix (we use it on 4.2.1 and
> have used it on 4.1.5).
>
> todd underwood
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, Rahmat Ara Bithi wrote:
>
> > Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 11:27:33 -0600 (GMT+6)
> > From: Rahmat Ara Bithi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: qmail for AIX
> >
> >
> > Is there any version of qmail for AIX?
> >
> > Bithi
> >
> >
>
>
Is it possible to add an automated message at the end of each mail which
is sending through my qmail server
Bithi
