qmail Digest 18 Mar 2000 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 944
Topics (messages 38673 through 38747):
Re: Deferral when host doesn't exist
38673 by: Chris Green
Re: Getting pop3d to work
38674 by: Chris Johnson
38691 by: TEK-KEE WANG
smart relay host
38675 by: Don Owens
38683 by: Uwe Ohse
38697 by: Russell Nelson
Re: qmail and coda
38676 by: Dave Sill
38677 by: Systems
38679 by: Dave Sill
38698 by: Adrian Pavlykevych
38701 by: Thomas Mangin Office
Re: Master Accounts and Multiple domains
38678 by: Dave Sill
Re: tcpserver unable to fork?
38680 by: Dave Sill
concurrencyremote
38681 by: Vaz, Len
38682 by: Dave Sill
Re: weird
38684 by: Ricardo Cerqueira
Re: Spam, orbs, maps
38685 by: Russell Nelson
Pop3 authentication
38686 by: Jonathan Fortin
38696 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: Throughput from qmail
38687 by: Russell Nelson
Re: TCPRULES help
38688 by: Russell Nelson
38705 by: Russell Nelson
spam/orbs, tcp-env, TCPREMOTEIP, and procmail -p
38689 by: Chris Hardie
38690 by: Petr Novotny
38692 by: Chris Hardie
38693 by: Chris Hardie
Re: shutting down tcpserver (pop3d) cleanly?
38694 by: Otis Gospodnetic
38695 by: Dave Sill
38703 by: Otis Gospodnetic
38704 by: Petr Novotny
Qmail without DNS
38699 by: wilke
38707 by: Charles Cazabon
Qmail Problem..
38700 by: Jonathan Fortin
Qmail Relay Question
38702 by: Jonathan Fortin
38706 by: markd.bushwire.net
38708 by: Lee Trotter
38709 by: markd.bushwire.net
38710 by: Dan Barber
38711 by: Petr Novotny
38712 by: Charles Cazabon
38713 by: Ted Deppner
38714 by: Lee Trotter
38715 by: Lee Trotter
38716 by: Petr Novotny
38717 by: Steve Wolfe
38719 by: Dave Sill
38721 by: Ted Deppner
38724 by: Racer X
38726 by: David Dyer-Bennet
38727 by: cfm.maine.com
38728 by: Aaron L. Meehan
38730 by: Jason.Baker.stdbev.com
38731 by: Chad Day
38733 by: Lee Trotter
38736 by: Adam McKenna
38744 by: Len Budney
qmail logs
38718 by: Vaz, Len
38720 by: Tim Hunter
38722 by: Dave Sill
CNAME in MX
38723 by: Mate Wierdl
38725 by: Scott D. Yelich
38729 by: Christopher Tarricone
38732 by: Magnus Bodin
38738 by: Mate Wierdl
38739 by: Mate Wierdl
To Clear something up
38734 by: Lee Trotter
We come in Peace; or BREEDING, FEEDING, GIVING and TAKING (was: Qmail Relay Question)
38735 by: Magnus Bodin
relay question
38737 by: Jonathan Fortin
38740 by: Aaron L. Meehan
Re:relay question
38741 by: Jason.Baker.stdbev.com
Single UID and Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name
38742 by: Otis Gospodnetic
Re: How can I operate two identical qmail servers?
38743 by: John White
this error will be a challenge...
38745 by: J.M. Roth \(iip\)
38746 by: markd.bushwire.net
Maildir Scalability Question
38747 by: David E. Weekly
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 11:48:11AM +0100, Frank Tegtmeyer wrote:
> > Is there a way to ask qmail to send warning messages (to the user or
> > to the postmaster) when such deferrals occur?
> Yes, there is a program call qmail_bounce. Look at www.qmail.org for
> Brian T. Wightman and his delayed mail notifier.
>
Thanks, someone else has pointed me in that direction too. It looks
like I'm going to be changing my qmail installation for the first time
in months (years?).
--
Chris Green ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.isbd.co.uk/
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 06:51:08PM +0800, TEK-KEE WANG wrote:
> The inetd.conf line reads :
>
> pop3 stream tcp nowait root /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup <FQHostname>
> /bin/checkpassword \
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir
I don't use inetd for this kind of thing, but I think it wants the first
argument of the program it runs to be the program name itself, i.e.:
pop3 stream tcp nowait root /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup qmail-popup fqdn etc.
You might consider using tcpserver instead of inetd for your qmail stuff.
You'll find much better support on this list for it.
See http://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp.html
Chris
Chris,
Thanks. You are right. I missed out an additional qmail-popup argument. Putting
it into the inetd.conf entry
makes pop3 works.
Tek Kee.
Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/17/2000 08:32:41 PM
To: TEK-KEE WANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED](bcc: TEK-KEE
WANG/317012/ITD/FEDEX)
Subject: Re: Getting pop3d to work
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 06:51:08PM +0800, TEK-KEE WANG wrote:
> The inetd.conf line reads :
>
> pop3 stream tcp nowait root /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup <FQHostname>
> /bin/checkpassword \
> /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir
I don't use inetd for this kind of thing, but I think it wants the first
argument of the program it runs to be the program name itself, i.e.:
pop3 stream tcp nowait root /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup qmail-popup fqdn etc.
You might consider using tcpserver instead of inetd for your qmail stuff.
You'll find much better support on this list for it.
See http://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp.html
Chris
Is there a qmail equivalent to sendmail's "Smart Relay Host"? I am
trying to set up qmail on a server to use more than one relay for
outgoing mail. With sendmail, I just set the smart relay host to
relay.host. When sendmail sends the message out, it chooses a host
from among the MX records for relay.host.
If I put the relay host name in smtproutes, qmail delivers it to
relay.host instead of to one of relay.host's mail exchangers. Does
anyone know how to make qmail use multiple relays for outgoing mail?
Thanks!
Don
--
Don Owens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.inetdreams.net/
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 05:09:36AM -0800, Don Owens wrote:
> relay.host instead of to one of relay.host's mail exchangers. Does
> anyone know how to make qmail use multiple relays for outgoing mail?
changing this line in qmail-remote.c:
switch (relayhost ? dns_ip(&ip,&host) : dns_mxip(&ip,&host,random)) {
to
switch (dns_mxip(&ip,&host,random)) {
may accomplish what you want.
Regards, Uwe
Don Owens writes:
> If I put the relay host name in smtproutes, qmail delivers it to
> relay.host instead of to one of relay.host's mail exchangers. Does
> anyone know how to make qmail use multiple relays for outgoing mail?
Sure. Make a new hostname with multiple A records that point to each
of the relays. Point smtproutes to that host.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
"Production Team 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>We are planning to use two PC for our mail system sharing a directory
>using coda. The DNS will be used to alternatively give one of the
>computer as smtp server.
>
>I would like to know if it is safe to only create one qmail queue
>under the shared directory
Absolutely not.
>as as far as I know the file name in the
>queue is created using the date and inode information which can drive
>to a "conflict".
That's not the real problem, which is that the queue was designed to
be "owned" by a single qmail installation.
-Dave
> That's not the real problem, which is that the queue was designed to
> be "owned" by a single qmail installation.
>
> -Dave
Thanx.
To solve this problem we are going to run two queues and only share the
users directories.
This sound good for you ??
Thomas
"Systems" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>To solve this problem we are going to run two queues and only share the
>users directories.
>This sound good for you ??
Yes.
-Dave
Hi!
If you want to use Coda for Maildirs, you have to make small patch to qmail-local:
Coda doesn't support file links between directories, so you need substitute
link(),unlink() for rename().
Her is the patch, but I can't vouch for it - haven't used it on production machine.
*** qmail-local.c.orig Tue Mar 14 10:21:56 2000
--- qmail-local.c Tue Mar 7 11:49:35 2000
***************
*** 127,134 ****
--- 127,138 ----
if (fsync(fd) == -1) goto fail;
if (close(fd) == -1) goto fail; /* NFS dorks */
+ #ifdef NFS_HACK
if (link(fntmptph,fnnewtph) == -1) goto fail;
/* if it was error_exist, almost certainly successful; i hate NFS */
+ #else
+ if (rename(fntmptph,fnnewtph) == -1) goto fail;
+ #endif
tryunlinktmp(); _exit(0);
fail: tryunlinktmp(); _exit(1);
--
Adrian Pavlykevych email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
System Administrator phone/fax: +380 (322) 742041
State University "Lvivska Polytechnica"
Ok thank you for this *very* useful information.
I will let anyone knows how this installation is going
(Give us a week at least we are quite busy ... Who isn't)
Thomas
----- Original Message -----
From: Adrian Pavlykevych <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Production Team 2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: qmail and coda
> Hi!
>
> If you want to use Coda for Maildirs, you have to make small patch to
qmail-local: Coda doesn't support file links between directories, so you
need substitute link(),unlink() for rename().
>
> Her is the patch, but I can't vouch for it - haven't used it on production
machine.
>
> *** qmail-local.c.orig Tue Mar 14 10:21:56 2000
> --- qmail-local.c Tue Mar 7 11:49:35 2000
> ***************
> *** 127,134 ****
> --- 127,138 ----
> if (fsync(fd) == -1) goto fail;
> if (close(fd) == -1) goto fail; /* NFS dorks */
>
> + #ifdef NFS_HACK
> if (link(fntmptph,fnnewtph) == -1) goto fail;
> /* if it was error_exist, almost certainly successful; i hate NFS */
> + #else
> + if (rename(fntmptph,fnnewtph) == -1) goto fail;
> + #endif
> tryunlinktmp(); _exit(0);
>
> fail: tryunlinktmp(); _exit(1);
>
> --
> Adrian Pavlykevych email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> System Administrator phone/fax: +380 (322) 742041
> State University "Lvivska Polytechnica"
>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 10:20:19PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >
>> > I tried to add in virtualdomains:
>> > anydomain.com:alias-anydomain
>> >
>> > then adding in /alias/.qmail-anydomain-default with the
>> > | forward [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > with this setup e-mail message disappears somewhere.
>
>Ok I do have anydomain.com in my control/locals , but when I take this
>domain out all the useres stop getting their e-mail for this domain.
Do you have a ~alias/.qmail-anydomain-masteruser file? What's in it?
Do you have ~alias/.qmail-anydomain-USER files for all anydomain.com
users?
Use "&[EMAIL PROTECTED]" instead of "| forward
[EMAIL PROTECTED]".
-Dave
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In an act of desperation, I started another tcpserver to listen on
>another interface. I noticed that I can only run a max of around 150
>smtpd's simultaneously, whether under one tcpserver or two.
You're likely hitting some OS resource limit like max processes per
user, max file descriptors, etc.
-Dave
Is there anyway of changing concurrencyremote while qmail is running and
have it take affect?
Thanks,
Len
"Vaz, Len" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Is there anyway of changing concurrencyremote while qmail is running and
>have it take affect?
No.
-Dave
On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 05:08:23PM -0500, Keith Warno wrote:
> eh?
>
> That would work; try "man forward" :)
>
Erm... it would, you're right... (*blush*)
Ricardo
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ricardo Cerqueira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2000 4:31 PM
> Subject: Re: weird
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 04:24:33PM -0600, Jonathan Fortin wrote:
> >
> >
> > Sorry for not being professional, i was just stressed out, btw, i got it
> > working fine and everything but i got one question,
> >
> > how do i forward all mail with broke username like
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] to admin account?
> >
> > i edited .qmail-default and add | forward [EMAIL PROTECTED] , is that
> good?
> >
>
> no, it's not...
> it should just be "&[EMAIL PROTECTED]".
> Try "man dot-qmail", too :)
>
> Ricardo
> --
> +-------------------
> | Ricardo Cerqueira
> | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
> | Novis - Rede T�cnica (Carrier Division)
> | P�. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7� E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal
>
>
--
+-------------------
| Ricardo Cerqueira
| PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
| Novis - Rede T�cnica
| P�. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7� E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal
Peter Schultz writes:
> Hi,
>
> I'm just curious about other people's opinions on which
> solution is best. Maildrop seems cool, but it's interesting
> to note that it doesn't recieve a mention on qmail's home
> page. Procmail doesn't even support qmail natively (although
> it looks like they're working on it) and it's mentioned
> twice.
Pure laziness on my part. It'll be there the next time I do edits.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
Hello,
About having an open relay, im using tcpserver /w qmail, how do i setup
qmail so it can authentication first thru pop3,
then let the user relay when he wants to send mail, thank you..
Jonathan Fortin, Network Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------
Revelex Canada
6830 Park Avenue Suite 209
Montreal,Qc
H3N 1W7
business: (514) 274-5120 ext. 228
cellular: (514) 242-7325
Jonathan Fortin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> About having an open relay, im using tcpserver /w qmail, how do i setup
> qmail so it can authentication first thru pop3,
> then let the user relay when he wants to send mail, thank you..
Bruce Guenter has written a package which does exactly this. Try:
http://www.em.ca/~bruceg/relay-ctrl/
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Vaz, Len writes:
> I know this is an open ended question with a lot of variables involved, but
> is there a place or does anyone know what the throughput might be for mail
> being sent out via qmail. How many emails/sec has qmail been known to send
> to the outside world with optimal configurations assumed? Please do not
> blast this email, like I said I know there are a lot of factors involved,
> from the OS you are running it on to the network you are on. Appreciate any
> help.
Sorry, Len, your question is impossible to answer as posed. The only
possible answer is a curve which correlates email-sending rates with
cost. I would be happy to produce such a curve for you. Simply write
a check for twice the amount on the cost axis at the end of the
curve. Make it payable to Crynwr and send it to the address below.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
Jay Moore writes:
> I would like to add the following to my tcp.smtp file for tcprules:
>
> .domain.com:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
>
> My question is can you use domain names with tcprules, or does it
> have to be IP addresses. In the man page all expamples use Ips and
> not domains.
There's a [ outdated ] patch to tcpserver to allow it to do this,
however it's very unwise to use domain names to permit services. You
can use it to deny services, though, e.g. disallowing spam from uunet
dialups.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
Anand Buddhdev writes:
> With the new tcpserver v 0.86, you can use hostnames. See the
> documentation.
Hrm. But Chuck Foster/John Levine's patch is still useful, because it
allows you more control over the results of the PTR lookup. Anybody
interested in bringing it up to date (it's on qmail.org/top.html)?
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
Hi. I'm currently implementing the "spam blocking on a per user basis"
solution using rblcheck and procmail. I've got everything in place and
all the command line tests pass just fine, but for some reason, by the
time procmail has gotten a hold of the message, the TCPREMOTEIP
environment variable is not populated.
I've been desperately pouring over the configuration and doing research
and can't seem to find an explanation for this. Is there a trick to
keeping this variable populated? Should I be using some version of an
"origip" script instead? Any insights?
Here's my config:
FreeBSD 3.3-RELEASE
inetd.conf:
smtp stream tcp nowait qmaild /var/qmail/bin/tcp-env tcp-env
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
------------------
.qmail:
| preline /usr/local/bin/procmail -p
------------------
.procmailrc:
:0
* ! ? if [ -n "$TCPREMOTEIP" ]; then /usr/local/bin/rblcheck -q "$TCPREMOTEIP"; fi
{
EXITCODE=100
LOGABSTRACT=all
LOG="Filter: RBL-filtered address: \"$TCPREMOTEIP\"\n"
:0:
$SPAMFOLDER
}
Thanks,
Chris
-- Chris Hardie -----------------------------
----- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------
-------- http://www.summersault.com/chris/ --
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 17 Mar 00, at 10:24, Chris Hardie wrote:
> Hi. I'm currently implementing the "spam blocking on a per user
> basis" solution using rblcheck and procmail. I've got everything in
> place and all the command line tests pass just fine, but for some
> reason, by the time procmail has gotten a hold of the message, the
> TCPREMOTEIP environment variable is not populated.
Sure. Please think about how qmail works:
qmail-smtpd gets message, passes to qmail-queue, message gets
queued, stop.
qmail-send wakes up, passes message to qmail-local, it passes
message to procmail.
The TCPREMOTEIP is present only in the first part - ie. qmail-
smtpd (and wrappers) and qmail-queue (and wrappers).
In the second part, you're not going to find it. All you can try to do
is parse headers, and find the last (first) Received: line and read
the originating IP; or you can ask qmail-smtpd, qmail-queue or
wrapper thereof to record a special X-TcpRemoteIp: header to the
message, as it gets spooled onto the disc.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBONJBTlMwP8g7qbw/EQIrGwCg/pP9ond7CKDpFTAKnCgb/xXG7wwAn0x7
gv4zLjR2s5f6ve8RdMwhPa6s
=igOo
-----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 Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Petr Novotny wrote:
> Sure. Please think about how qmail works:
> qmail-smtpd gets message, passes to qmail-queue, message gets
> queued, stop.
> qmail-send wakes up, passes message to qmail-local, it passes
> message to procmail.
>
> The TCPREMOTEIP is present only in the first part - ie. qmail-
> smtpd (and wrappers) and qmail-queue (and wrappers).
>
Makes perfect sense. Many of the docs on the ORBS and Qmail sites and
related lists/sites provide examples (that I pretty much copy/pasted) that
would indicate the variable is populated when Procmail runs, so I guess I
was assuming that the qmail environment was transferred to any script
invoked from a .qmail file.
These things being said, does anyone have a good origip script to
suggest?
Someone posted the below script to a list a while ago, but it's a
little too simple (recognizes 127.0.0.1) and failed on the test message I
requested from "[EMAIL PROTECTED]", the ORBS test address:
#!/usr/bin/perl
# Specifically for pulling the remote IP address out of Sendmail
# Received: headers. Supplied by Ophir Ronen <ophir@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
# ever-so-slightly modified by Edward S. Marshall <emarshal@xxxxxxxxx>.
#
# $Id: origip.pl,v 1.1.1.1 1998/01/09 20:42:50 emarshal Exp $
#
# $Log: origip.pl,v $
# Revision 1.1.1.1 1998/01/09 20:42:50 emarshal
# Initial import into CVS.
#
@msg = <STDIN>;
foreach $line ( @msg )
{
chop $line;
if( $line =~ /.*\[(\d+.*)\]/ )
{
$REMOTEIP = $1;
last;
}
}
print STDOUT ( $REMOTEIP );
-- Chris Hardie -----------------------------
----- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------
-------- http://www.summersault.com/chris/ --
Strike that, there's one included with the rblcheck package, it just
didn't install by default with FreeBSD's /usr/ports make.
Sorry for the laziness and sloth exhibited here on my part. :)
Chris
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Chris Hardie wrote:
> These things being said, does anyone have a good origip script to
> suggest?
>
-- Chris Hardie -----------------------------
----- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------
-------- http://www.summersault.com/chris/ --
> > This starts tcpserver/pop3d, but how do I go about shutting it down cleanly?
>Anything nicer than a 'kill'?
>
> kill uses the ``SIGTERM'' by default, which politely asks the process
> to die after it has cleaned up.
>
> kill -KILL shoots the process without warning.
OK, kill (regular, not -9) is fine with me :)
Is there an easy (i.e. 'automatic') way of getting the PID of the tcpserver?
This is how I'm starting qmail-pop3d with tcpserver:
tcpserver -v -R 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup makina.domena.com \
/usr/local/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 | \
/var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d &
Would this log the PID in some file so that I can do
kill `cat /path/to/pid/file` from the 'stop)' section of my 'boot script'
(/etc/rc.d/init.d/...) ?
Thanks,
Otis
______________________________________________
Get free e-mail at http://www.britannica.com
Otis Gospodnetic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>OK, kill (regular, not -9) is fine with me :)
>Is there an easy (i.e. 'automatic') way of getting the PID of the tcpserver?
daemontools
-Dave
Hi Petr,
I did what you said - I put pop3d under supervise as well (I already had smtpd under
supervise).
It looks like pop3d is running fine, but authentication fails for some reason now and
I'm wondering if it is because I'm trying to run pop3d under user 'qmaild' ?
>> more /var/qmail/supervise/qmail-pop3d/run
#!/bin/sh
QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild`
NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 2000000 \
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R -u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0 pop-3
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup nmlinux1.neomeo.com \
/usr/local/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1
Should I be running pop3d under a different uid?
Thanks,
Otis
On Fri, 17 March 2000, "Petr Novotny" wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 17 Mar 00, at 7:42, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
> > This is how I'm starting qmail-pop3d with tcpserver:
> >
> > tcpserver -v -R 0 pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup
> > makina.domena.com \ /usr/local/bin/checkpassword
> > /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>&1 | \
> > /var/qmail/bin/splogger pop3d &
>
> Add "echo $! > /var/run/tcpserver.pop.pid" after this line. Kill with
> "kill `cat /var/run/tcpserver.pop.pid`"
>
> Or, get yourself daemontools and run tcpserver under supervise.
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
> Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
>
> iQA/AwUBONJGxFMwP8g7qbw/EQJ7MQCffn7imJdnKUdE1W2Ag1loipfwVasAmwcP
> RFg02RHt6bNMAZRBrRdfnqiM
> =ct9e
> -----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]
______________________________________________
Get free e-mail at http://www.britannica.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 17 Mar 00, at 9:45, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
> #!/bin/sh
> QMAILDUID=`id -u qmaild`
> NOFILESGID=`id -g qmaild`
> exec /usr/local/bin/softlimit -m 2000000 \
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -R -u $QMAILDUID -g $NOFILESGID 0
> pop-3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup nmlinux1.neomeo.com \
> /usr/local/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d
> Maildir 2>&1
POP3 must run as root. Simply strike out the -u and -g parameters.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBONJh31MwP8g7qbw/EQIuVQCfeGn43bS6srad+iZaEDuikDzrh44AoOjW
zl+J/2VHcEQauQk3BSLNU4Z/
=sWmn
-----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]
|
I�m begin to install qmail in my computer and i
have a direct conection with the internet, Should i had to have a DNS entrie for
qmail make a relay on messages to a external smtp and pop3??
Can i use a qmail just for do relay between smtp
servers?? There are another more easy way to do this??
Thank you and sorry about the
english.......(-:
|
wilke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I�m begin to install qmail in my computer and i have a direct conection with the
>internet, Should i had to have a DNS entrie for qmail make a relay on messages to a
>external smtp and pop3??
> Can i use a qmail just for do relay between smtp servers?? There are another more
>easy way to do this??
Not quite sure exactly what you're asking, but...
If you just want an MTA to relay all messages from your local machine to
your ISP's SMTP server, try using nullmailer instead -- it's designed for
relaying to a smarthost like that.
You can get it from Bruce Guenter's site, at:
http://www.em.ca/~bruceg/nullmailer/
Then, for POP3 retrieval, use something like 'fetchmail' or my own
'getmail':
http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/getmail/
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
Im having some problems on certain issues, how do i setup qmail so it will
only accept emails thru the smtp server
if the to: is to our domain and not to any other domain, so we can stop
relayers..
Thanks
Jonathan Fortin, Network Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------
Revelex Canada
6830 Park Avenue Suite 209
Montreal,Qc
H3N 1W7
business: (514) 274-5120 ext. 228
cellular: (514) 242-7325
Hello,
How , in qmail, do i only allow mail to host to our domain.com so if users
try accessing our server, they can only send
to our domain.com and not other domains, how do i do this in qmail?
thank you.
Jonathan Fortin, Network Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------
Revelex Canada
6830 Park Avenue Suite 209
Montreal,Qc
H3N 1W7
business: (514) 274-5120 ext. 228
cellular: (514) 242-7325
As a Network Administrator do you get frustrated with people who ask
you questions and make no effort to find the answer themselves? Do these
people seem too lazy to take the time to learn or they think that their time
is more valuable than yours?
Do you respond better to people who have made some effort and got stuck? Do
you like people who say "well, I read the documentation, tried this and that,
here are the results, but I don't quite understand this bit?".
Guess what? Most people on this list respond better to those kind
of people too!
You could have read the FAQ and said which part you didn't understand.
You could have search the archives and found that this question has been
asked and answered 100s of times.
You could have gone to www.qmail.org and seen that numerous people have
online documentation that tells you how to do this.
Regards.
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 12:40:01PM -0600, Jonathan Fortin wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
> How , in qmail, do i only allow mail to host to our domain.com so if users
> try accessing our server, they can only send
> to our domain.com and not other domains, how do i do this in qmail?
>
> thank you.
>
> Jonathan Fortin, Network Administrator
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --------------------------------------
> Revelex Canada
> 6830 Park Avenue Suite 209
> Montreal,Qc
> H3N 1W7
> business: (514) 274-5120 ext. 228
> cellular: (514) 242-7325
>
>
>
I have been watching this list for a few weeks now. And the people on
here are the most un-helpful people I have seen. Your typical answer to a
question is man this or man that. And yes I understand that there are people
that don't read the docs, but this list is typical of linux
users/administrators in that you reply in a very curt sort, "I don't have
the time for you because you are not as smart as me" way. I have seen this a
number of times on here. Part of the problem with linux is it's very cryptic
documentation. As such users need to relay on other more experienced people.
I am also on an IIS list and not once has someone been put down for not
searching the archives or reading one of the manuals, which are not nearly
as cryptic as the liunx/qmail documentation. Frankly I don't have the time
to search though hundreds of emails in the archive, so I'll ask my question.
Hopefully someone will take time out of his or her busy day to answer it and
I will respond when there is a question I can answer, if I can't answer a
question I don't respond. I feel that qmail is a superior email system but I
have ripped out hair by the frustration felt trying to get it up and
running, yet I can walk into a bookstore and find 30 different books on
sendmail and exchange. Rather then chastise people for asking questions you
should be happy they are showing an interest in one of the non-mainstream
products and not just taking the easy way out.
I have no doubt that this will cause a number of "flames" but for those
of you that do it only confirms what I said before.
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jonathan Fortin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: Qmail Relay Question
> As a Network Administrator do you get frustrated with people who ask
> you questions and make no effort to find the answer themselves? Do these
> people seem too lazy to take the time to learn or they think that their
time
> is more valuable than yours?
>
> Do you respond better to people who have made some effort and got stuck?
Do
> you like people who say "well, I read the documentation, tried this and
that,
> here are the results, but I don't quite understand this bit?".
>
> Guess what? Most people on this list respond better to those kind
> of people too!
>
> You could have read the FAQ and said which part you didn't understand.
>
> You could have search the archives and found that this question has been
> asked and answered 100s of times.
>
> You could have gone to www.qmail.org and seen that numerous people have
> online documentation that tells you how to do this.
>
>
> Regards.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 12:40:01PM -0600, Jonathan Fortin wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> > How , in qmail, do i only allow mail to host to our domain.com so if
users
> > try accessing our server, they can only send
> > to our domain.com and not other domains, how do i do this in qmail?
> >
> > thank you.
> >
> > Jonathan Fortin, Network Administrator
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > --------------------------------------
> > Revelex Canada
> > 6830 Park Avenue Suite 209
> > Montreal,Qc
> > H3N 1W7
> > business: (514) 274-5120 ext. 228
> > cellular: (514) 242-7325
> >
> >
> >
>
> here are the most un-helpful people I have seen. Your typical answer to a
I'm teaching him to fish. You want to keep feeding him fish. I think my
way is actually more helpful.
Regards.
He is fishing... for an answer. Why don't you just answer the
poor guy? Or do you think that you're going to singlehandedly
change the way he acts by being rude?
Regards
Dan Barber
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > here are the most un-helpful people I have seen. Your typical answer to a
>
> I'm teaching him to fish. You want to keep feeding him fish. I think my
> way is actually more helpful.
>
>
> Regards.
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 17 Mar 00, at 13:37, Lee Trotter wrote:
> "I don't
> have the time for you because you are not as smart as me"
That's not it. "This is Unix - stop acting so clueless" is more apt.
> Frankly I don't have the time to search though hundreds
> of emails in the archive, so I'll ask my question.
What do you think, our time is less valuable than yours?
> Hopefully someone
> will take time out of his or her busy day to answer it and I will
> respond when there is a question I can answer, if I can't answer a
> question I don't respond.
Already did, remember? It's spelled out in FAQ (part of qmail
tarball). Namely FAQ #5.4.
Or are you asking someone to stuff the answer down your throat?
You already have it on a silver plate.
>I feel that qmail is a superior email system
> but I have ripped out hair by the frustration felt trying to get it up
> and running, yet I can walk into a bookstore and find 30 different
> books on sendmail and exchange.
So please do. Do you find it simpler to read 30 books on sendmail,
than to read a FAQ file, and Life with Qmail? (And search the
archives perhaps?) That's something I don't quite understand.
> I have no doubt that this will cause a number of "flames" but for
> those
> of you that do it only confirms what I said before.
Ah. Sorry to hurt your feelings.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBONJxPVMwP8g7qbw/EQKx9wCbBzmbjisox6/lf8joUN2AdZEO13YAoIaO
eg6tmPDVckt8CIMaQCRavWB1
=yomN
-----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]
Lee Trotter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been watching this list for a few weeks now. And the people on
> here are the most un-helpful people I have seen.
I would beg to disagree with you. There is very little flaming on the list.
> Part of the problem with linux is it's very cryptic
> documentation.
This isn't a Linux thing, it's a Unix thing. Unix man pages are very dense,
useful references -- they're not meant to be an "introduction" to a subject.
They are a quick reference for options, values, config files, etc, for a
person who is already familiar with a program/command/syscall.
Man pages are for people who don't think you should have to keep a 600-page
manual around just to look up "which commandline option tells this program
to do foo?".
> Frankly I don't have the time
> to search though hundreds of emails in the archive, so I'll ask my question.
> Hopefully someone will take time out of his or her busy day to answer it
So, your time is too valuable to waste looking for answers on your own,
but you expect other people to have nothing better to do than answer the
same question, over and over? The original poster asked about how to do
selective relaying -- it's the number one most commonly asked question
on the qmail mailing list, and is answered in at least the following places:
-/var/qmail/doc/FAQ
-the author's qmail web page
-www.qmail.org
-Dave Sill's Life with qmail
-the faq pages at fqts.com or whatever it's name is
-in the q-cards web pages
-and in dozens of places in the qmail mailing list archives.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 01:37:45PM -0500, Lee Trotter wrote:
> I have been watching this list for a few weeks now. And the people on
> here are the most un-helpful people I have seen. Your typical answer to a
> question is man this or man that. And yes I understand that there are people
I believe it's the general feeling of many that you simply should not be
an admin of a complex system (be it unix, linux, sendmail, qmail, etc)
unless you can find, read, and understand the existing documentation for
that system.
As such, in a peer to peer fashion "hey buddy, you can find that in this
man page" is perfectly appropriate. I agree the occasional flame is not
the best idea, but then again we must get the attention of errant people.
> as cryptic as the liunx/qmail documentation. Frankly I don't have the time
> to search though hundreds of emails in the archive, so I'll ask my question.
If you don't have the time to read installation and maintenance documentation
you probably don't have the time to properly secure your machine and keep
up to date with security problems.
In short, you probably shouldn't be running that complex a service, until
you can fully support what you're trying to run.
Be clear on this point: The informed person asking the tough question gets
_excellent_ support from this list.
PS: This is a non-personal fact-based reply. It is not a flame.
--
Ted Deppner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.psyber.com
> > Frankly I don't have the time
> > to search though hundreds of emails in the archive, so I'll ask my
question.
> > Hopefully someone will take time out of his or her busy day to answer it
>
> So, your time is too valuable to waste looking for answers on your own,
> but you expect other people to have nothing better to do than answer the
> same question, over and over? The original poster asked about how to do
> selective relaying -- it's the number one most commonly asked question
> on the qmail mailing list, and is answered in at least the following
places:
My time is not more valuable then yours I never said it was however if I can
find the answer in an easier fashion such as from someone who don't mind
answering me why not use it? If you don't want to answer someone because
they you feel it would waste your time then don't. But expect the same
response on what you might feel is a vaild question and someone else thinks
would just be wasting their time. If all the questions have been answered
then whats the point of a mailing list?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Cazabon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Lee Trotter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: Qmail Relay Question
> Lee Trotter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have been watching this list for a few weeks now. And the people
on
> > here are the most un-helpful people I have seen.
>
> I would beg to disagree with you. There is very little flaming on the
list.
>
> > Part of the problem with linux is it's very cryptic
> > documentation.
>
> This isn't a Linux thing, it's a Unix thing. Unix man pages are very
dense,
> useful references -- they're not meant to be an "introduction" to a
subject.
> They are a quick reference for options, values, config files, etc, for a
> person who is already familiar with a program/command/syscall.
>
> Man pages are for people who don't think you should have to keep a
600-page
> manual around just to look up "which commandline option tells this program
> to do foo?".
>
> > Frankly I don't have the time
> > to search though hundreds of emails in the archive, so I'll ask my
question.
> > Hopefully someone will take time out of his or her busy day to answer it
>
> So, your time is too valuable to waste looking for answers on your own,
> but you expect other people to have nothing better to do than answer the
> same question, over and over? The original poster asked about how to do
> selective relaying -- it's the number one most commonly asked question
> on the qmail mailing list, and is answered in at least the following
places:
>
> -/var/qmail/doc/FAQ
> -the author's qmail web page
> -www.qmail.org
> -Dave Sill's Life with qmail
> -the faq pages at fqts.com or whatever it's name is
> -in the q-cards web pages
> -and in dozens of places in the qmail mailing list archives.
>
> Charles
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
> Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > as cryptic as the liunx/qmail documentation. Frankly I don't have the
time
> > to search though hundreds of emails in the archive, so I'll ask my
question.
>
> If you don't have the time to read installation and maintenance
documentation
> you probably don't have the time to properly secure your machine and keep
> up to date with security problems.
I never said I don't read the documentation. I said search the email
archives.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Deppner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lee Trotter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 2:01 PM
Subject: Re: Qmail Relay Question
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 01:37:45PM -0500, Lee Trotter wrote:
> > I have been watching this list for a few weeks now. And the people
on
> > here are the most un-helpful people I have seen. Your typical answer to
a
> > question is man this or man that. And yes I understand that there are
people
>
> I believe it's the general feeling of many that you simply should not be
> an admin of a complex system (be it unix, linux, sendmail, qmail, etc)
> unless you can find, read, and understand the existing documentation for
> that system.
>
> As such, in a peer to peer fashion "hey buddy, you can find that in this
> man page" is perfectly appropriate. I agree the occasional flame is not
> the best idea, but then again we must get the attention of errant people.
>
> > as cryptic as the liunx/qmail documentation. Frankly I don't have the
time
> > to search though hundreds of emails in the archive, so I'll ask my
question.
>
> If you don't have the time to read installation and maintenance
documentation
> you probably don't have the time to properly secure your machine and keep
> up to date with security problems.
>
> In short, you probably shouldn't be running that complex a service, until
> you can fully support what you're trying to run.
>
> Be clear on this point: The informed person asking the tough question
gets
> _excellent_ support from this list.
>
> PS: This is a non-personal fact-based reply. It is not a flame.
>
> --
> Ted Deppner
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.psyber.com
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 17 Mar 00, at 13:58, Lee Trotter wrote:
> If all the questions have been answered then whats the point of a mailing
> list?
To answer the complicated questions, obviously. Not all questions
have been answered. Those that have been are archived
somewhere though - like in FAQ, or in this list's archives.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2 -- QDPGP 2.60
Comment: http://community.wow.net/grt/qdpgp.html
iQA/AwUBONJ1PlMwP8g7qbw/EQIRqACg0ELAz6nONcKDUyA+R6BYPqRbmkUAoPvw
+ELdRSEQ/XrySeZXIZHAAdmk
=4hIm
-----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]
> I have been watching this list for a few weeks now. And the people on
> here are the most un-helpful people I have seen. Your typical answer to a
> question is man this or man that.
When I first signed up to this list, I wondered why people didn't just
give answers, then I realized: It gets very, very tiring answering the
same question day after day, especially when the information is very easily
obtainable in other areas. Simply shoveling out information does a
disservice to the asker, the responder, the list member, and the world at
large:
1. The asker. By simply shoveling out information, you are reinforcing
several erroneous and harmful ideas:
A) Reading the supplied documentation is not necessary.
B) Making some effort to search for the answer yourself is not
necessary (Do you know how many questions here can be answered by "go to
www.qmail.org"?)
C) Signing up to a mailing list and asking a question without even
reading the FAQ is how things should be done.
D) Simply making a quick-fix without knowing how it works is just
dandy.
2) The responder. It drives most of us insane typing out the same reply
day after day on "How do I restrict relaying?".
3) The list member. Do you sign up to a list to see the same questions
answered three or four times per day?
4) The world at large. This is for two reasons. First, we consume
bandwidth and storage space answering questions that could have easily been
answered by going to www.qmail.org. Second, those questions drive many of
us insane. Would you rather we went out in the street and started shooting
with a high-pwoered rifle, or that we simply tell the person where to find
the information for themselves?
> And yes I understand that there are people
> that don't read the docs, but this list is typical of linux
> users/administrators in that you reply in a very curt sort, "I don't have
> the time for you because you are not as smart as me" way.
That attitude isn't at all typical of linux administrators, it's typical
of a fewhigh-profile Unix programmers (who shall remain nameless). Then,
the "Ooh, I want to be cool like {Insert High-Profile Name}" people try to
emulate it. Most of the Linux community realizes that without cooperation
and education, they're doomed to fail. I try to walk the middle ground and
say "Well, here's an excellent resource where you can learn how to do what
you need to." You'd be surprised at the differences in attitude between
comp.os.linux and comp.lang.perl or comp.lang.c.
>Frankly I don't have the time
> to search though hundreds of emails in the archive, so I'll ask my
question.
That's certainly an erroneous attitude. By searching the archive, you
can have an answer in minutes. By asking the list, you're at the mercy of
other people's time and fancies. I'd rather spend 5 to 10 minutes
searching an archive than waiting half a day for someone else to
respond....
> sendmail and exchange. Rather then chastise people for asking questions
you
> should be happy they are showing an interest
And teach them how to teach themselves.
> in one of the non-mainstream
> products and not just taking the easy way out.
QMail is mainstream. Microsoft proved that when they tried to convert
HotMail to NT, and their engineers admitted that they simply could not do
it, and that moving back to QMail was the best thing to do.
steve
"Lee Trotter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been watching this list for a few weeks now. And the people on
>here are the most un-helpful people I have seen.
I don't think you're being fair. Even people who "rudely" tell someone
to read the FAQ or a man page are being helpful. Truly unhelpful
people don't reply at all, even curtly.
>Your typical answer to a
>question is man this or man that. And yes I understand that there are people
>that don't read the docs,
And the person who started this thread is clearly one of them. After
two days of posting the newbiest of queries, someone finally got fed
up and told him to do his homework.
>but this list is typical of linux
WARNING: generalizations ahead...
>users/administrators in that you reply in a very curt sort, "I don't have
>the time for you because you are not as smart as me" way.
How about "I don't have the time to read the FAQ and man pages for
every newbie and hold their hand throughout their qmail initiation"?
Well, jeeze, is it reasonable to expect qmail experts to spend lots of
unpaid time on people who can't be bothered to read the docs?
>I have seen this a
>number of times on here. Part of the problem with linux is it's very cryptic
>documentation. As such users need to relay on other more experienced people.
"Life with qmail" is cryptic? And, of course, qmail <> Linux.
>I am also on an IIS list and not once has someone been put down for not
>searching the archives or reading one of the manuals, which are not nearly
>as cryptic as the liunx/qmail documentation.
That list is obviously more tolerant of lazy, clueless newbies. We're
not, and we're PROUD of it. We expect more from our newbies. We help
those who at least try to help themselves first.
>Frankly I don't have the time
>to search though hundreds of emails in the archive, so I'll ask my question.
Read that sentence and tell me it's not offensively arrogant. *You*
don't have the time to pop a couple terms into the archive search
engine and see if your question has already been answered? But you
expect *us* to waste our time answering you?
BZZT! Thanks for playing.
>Hopefully someone will take time out of his or her busy day to answer it and
>I will respond when there is a question I can answer, if I can't answer a
>question I don't respond. I feel that qmail is a superior email system but I
>have ripped out hair by the frustration felt trying to get it up and
>running, yet I can walk into a bookstore and find 30 different books on
>sendmail and exchange. Rather then chastise people for asking questions you
>should be happy they are showing an interest in one of the non-mainstream
>products and not just taking the easy way out.
We're tickled pink when newbies join the qmail fold, unless they're
too lazy to read the damned FAQ.
> I have no doubt that this will cause a number of "flames" but for those
>of you that do it only confirms what I said before.
No, what it confirms is that we vehemently disagree with you.
-Dave
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 02:00:41PM -0500, Lee Trotter wrote:
> > > Frankly I don't have the time to search though hundreds of emails in
> > > the archive, so I'll ask my question.
> >
> > If you don't have the time to read installation and maintenance
> > documentation you probably don't have the time to properly secure your
> > machine and keep up to date with security problems.
>
> I never said I don't read the documentation. I said search the email
> archives.
s/documentation/body of documentation/
The email archives, faqs, man pages, etc are all part of the widely
available body of documentation for any system.
The implication of your statements implys you don't have the time to read
BugTraq, list-iap, list-isp, or any of the other security forums
available.
My point stands.
--
Ted Deppner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.psyber.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Trotter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "qmail list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Fri 17 Mar 2000 10:58
Subject: Re: Qmail Relay Question
> My time is not more valuable then yours I never said it was however if
I can
You pretty clearly implied it was, if you didn't actually say it.
> find the answer in an easier fashion such as from someone who don't
mind
> answering me why not use it? If you don't want to answer someone
because
Because most of the people on this list DO mind answering it, and they
also mind having to see the same questions posted over and over again.
My apologies if I'm speaking for too many people here, but I don't think
my assumption is too far off.
> they you feel it would waste your time then don't. But expect the
same
> response on what you might feel is a vaild question and someone else
thinks
> would just be wasting their time. If all the questions have been
answered
> then whats the point of a mailing list?
Mailing lists are "push" sources of information. When new information
comes out, it's sent to everyone. No one wants to have the same
information fed to them over and over again; that's what we have "pull"
sources (references, docs, man pages, FAQs, list archives, etc) for.
Not to be rude here, but if you aren't reasonably sure your question is
valid and important, you should go check the other resources first and
make sure it hasn't been answered before.
shag
=====
Judd Bourgeois | CNM Network +1 (805) 520-7170
Software Architect | 1900 Los Angeles Avenue, 2nd Floor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Simi Valley, CA 93065
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Ted Deppner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 17 March 2000 at 11:01:10 -0800
> Be clear on this point: The informed person asking the tough question gets
> _excellent_ support from this list.
I have to agree with this. I've even gotten excellent support on
*easy* questions; maybe I was just lucky with my timing, or maybe it's
that I managed to ask the question in such a way as to make people
understand I'd made a really solid try, and was just trapped in one of
those mental loops where you can't get out of the box to see the real
answer. Whatver the reason -- I consistently get excellent support
from this list when I need to ask questions. And if somebody gets a
bit sharp in a response, I just ignore it, and continue the technical
part of the conversation. Works for me.
--
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
Bookworms: http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 02:19:42PM -0500, Dave Sill wrote:
> "Lee Trotter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I have been watching this list for a few weeks now. And the people on
> >here are the most un-helpful people I have seen.
>
> I don't think you're being fair. Even people who "rudely" tell someone
> to read the FAQ or a man page are being helpful. Truly unhelpful
> people don't reply at all, even curtly.
Of the many lists to which I subscribe this has by far the best
signal-to-noise ratio. Others deteriorate, good people leave and
the resource is wasted. Now I practice "rude behavior" on other
lists. ;^)
Put a free and unguarded resource out there, people will piss on it,
waste it and wreck it.
$.02
--
Christopher F. Miller, Publisher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MaineStreet Communications, Inc 208 Portland Road, Gray, ME 04039
1.207.657.5078 http://www.maine.com/
Database publishing, e-commerce, office/internet integration, Debian linux.
Quoting Lee Trotter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I am also on an IIS list and not once has someone been put down for not
^^^
Well, that explains it.
> searching the archives or reading one of the manuals, which are not nearly
> as cryptic as the liunx/qmail documentation. Frankly I don't have the time
> to search though hundreds of emails in the archive
Man, that's a bad sign. A Bad Sign indeed. Don't have time to read
docs? A script kiddie's dream to find a network operated with the
assumption that help is merely an outlook express click-and-drool
session away. You're connected via DSL, so I guess you're not an
access provider, thank goodness. But, how am I to tell, I can't see
your website!
So as to not seem like a complete flame, here's some advice:
1 - Don't assume qmail has anything to do with linux (I had to put that in).
2 - Don't assume others have time to help you.
3 - Assume your problem is answered somewhere already.
The latter two are so obvious you probably know it already. The
original poster had ``Network Administrator'' in his sig -- IMO that
implies a certain level of knowledge and common sense that is so
lacking in his mails to this list.
So why is your webserver not sending data? Might want to
click-and-drool an emergency help request to the IIS list. Ohh, ouch!
good luck,
Aaron
pretty much all of the mailing lists that I am on agree on one point. Asking
newbie questions is ok, we were all newbies at one point. BUT, their is a way to
ask them that will give you the most response without having to put on a pair of
Nomex Underwear.
"I did A, I expected B, I received C. Im running on N, and wasn't able to find
this problem in TFM / other checked sources."
Or another popular method seems to be
"Im heading off in this direction and would like pointers to other sources of
info other then the FAQ. A how-to or some such."
An example would be my first post to this list not more then a week ago. After
getting Qmail to do what I wanted, relaying ironically enough, in retrospect it
was a very newbie question. I was still checking out qmail VS sendmail and
hadn't had a chance to read really deep into either FM. But I phrased my
question in a way so as not to be asking for charity, but rather a push in the
right direction. Most projects in this type of community are the same on this
aspect. Ask for a push, not for a handout.
Even though the question about relaying was the same, its how you ask for help.
Jason Baker
Totally agree. I've asked a couple questions I regretted asking once I got
a response saying "man xxx", but even that helped me by pointing me to the
correct man page.. was looking in the wrong place a lot of the time, or just
didn't understand how qmail functioned.. but I think I did a good job at
saying I had spent time trying to solve the problem on my own, and for one
reason or another, just couldn't find the answer.
Mailing list archives are -great-. That's usually the first place I go when
I'm stuck, because if I'm getting stuck, I bet someone got stuck just like
me, and likely asked for help on the list.. I'd much rather try to find the
answer there, save time, learn something about qmail in the process, and
patch it up myself rather than send an e-mail out, wait hours for a reply,
telling me to put line x in file y, which learned me nothing.
Chad
-----Original Message-----
From: David Dyer-Bennet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 2:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Qmail Relay Question
Ted Deppner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 17 March 2000 at 11:01:10 -0800
> Be clear on this point: The informed person asking the tough question
gets
> _excellent_ support from this list.
I have to agree with this. I've even gotten excellent support on
*easy* questions; maybe I was just lucky with my timing, or maybe it's
that I managed to ask the question in such a way as to make people
understand I'd made a really solid try, and was just trapped in one of
those mental loops where you can't get out of the box to see the real
answer. Whatver the reason -- I consistently get excellent support
from this list when I need to ask questions. And if somebody gets a
bit sharp in a response, I just ignore it, and continue the technical
part of the conversation. Works for me.
--
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
Bookworms: http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Quoting Lee Trotter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > I am also on an IIS list and not once has someone been put down for not
> ^^^
> Well, that explains it.
>
Ah one of the Linux is better then NT people, each technolgy has it's place.
Don't assume one is better then the other.
> > searching the archives or reading one of the manuals, which are not
nearly
> > as cryptic as the liunx/qmail documentation. Frankly I don't have the
time
> > to search though hundreds of emails in the archive
>
> Man, that's a bad sign. A Bad Sign indeed. Don't have time to read
> docs? A script kiddie's dream to find a network operated with the
> assumption that help is merely an outlook express click-and-drool
> session away. You're connected via DSL, so I guess you're not an
> access provider, thank goodness. But, how am I to tell, I can't see
> your website!
>
Yes our web site was down, it happens you know, we are in the process of
doing a number of upgrades, one of which is moving to qmail and a linux web
server, however I cannot move all our mail to a server I do not know how to
operate yet. You insult us by with your thank goodness, that implies your
one of the I'm better then you people since your server was down and you
only have a dsl.
> So as to not seem like a complete flame, here's some advice:
>
> 1 - Don't assume qmail has anything to do with linux (I had to put that
in).
> 2 - Don't assume others have time to help you.
> 3 - Assume your problem is answered somewhere already.
>
> The latter two are so obvious you probably know it already. The
> original poster had ``Network Administrator'' in his sig -- IMO that
> implies a certain level of knowledge and common sense that is so
> lacking in his mails to this list.
>
In todays world many people are given jobs that always what they have been
trained for, as such I'm a programmer that has also been tasked with server
admin, when you work for a small company you do not always have the luxuary
of hiring dedicated networking gurus. I take the time to read the manuals
but do not always find or understrand the answer, then I must turn to other
resources to find what I need to know.
>
> good luck,
>
> Aaron
>
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 03:48:22PM -0500, Lee Trotter wrote:
>
> > Quoting Lee Trotter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > I am also on an IIS list and not once has someone been put down for not
> > ^^^
> > Well, that explains it.
> >
> Ah one of the Linux is better then NT people, each technolgy has it's place.
> Don't assume one is better then the other.
I don't think that's the point he was trying to make.
--Adam
"Steve Wolfe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I have been watching this list for a few weeks now. And the people
> > on here are the most un-helpful people I have seen. Your typical
> > answer to a question is man this or man that.
>
> When I first signed up to this list, I wondered why people didn't just
> give answers, then I realized: ... Simply shoveling out information
> does a disservice to the asker, the responder, the list member, and
> the world at large ...
Amen. And very well put.
(When I first signed up, back in '96, I was completely clueless about email
and asked utterly inane questions, which were mercifully ignored. The
experience was quite embarrassing, but ultimately was very helpful.)
> > "I don't have the time for you because you are not as smart as me"
>
> That attitude isn't at all typical of linux administrators, it's typical
> of a few high-profile Unix programmers (who shall remain nameless).
If you mean Dan, I beg to differ. Dan ignores most stupid questions,
patiently answers a few, and usually bites hard only after explaining
something and being contradicted. In this respect he's just like any
Math professor/competent mathematician I've ever known--he reserves his
scorn for people who've had a chance to RTFM but refuse and then continue
to bother him.
> Then, the "Ooh, I want to be cool like {Insert High-Profile Name}"
> people try to emulate it.
I'm certainly an ``Ooh, I want to be as knowledgable and competent as Dan''
person. Many of us are. And maybe some of Dan's style rubs off, as well as
some of his knowledge. But mostly people hate to answer the same question
over and over; your previous excellent explanation nailed it.
Len.
--
Unfortunately, spammers deliberately subvert priority mechanisms,
making their ``bad'' messages indistinguishable from ``good''
messages.
-- Dan Bernstein, author of qmail
Using multilog. I have one file with an extension with of .u
Under what circumstances would that happen?
Len
This happens when logging is not shutdown properly, like a system crash or
a -KILL.
-----Original Message-----
From: Vaz, Len [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 2:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: qmail logs
Using multilog. I have one file with an extension with of .u
Under what circumstances would that happen?
Len
"Vaz, Len" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Using multilog. I have one file with an extension with of .u
>Under what circumstances would that happen?
>From ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/daemontools/multilog.html:
.u: This file was being created at the moment of an outage. It may
have been truncated and has not been processed.
An "outage" could be an OS crash, a power failure, a "kill -9", a
hardware failure, etc.
-Dave
Can a CNAME in an MX record cause a problem for qmail?
I mean, our sysadm set up
cs.memphis.edu preference = 10, mail exchanger = mx.cs.memphis.edu
where mx.cs.memphis.edu is an alias.
If it can, how exactly?
Thx
Mate
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Sigh.
Here we go again.
Scott
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBONKLGFpGPE+AF6qBAQHJWAQAtRxevMTwJMYbGw1xerYKgd7UMDgZagGF
KTILWlFSQNElBDc7lOdwTR0xORfrOxn7jyNvOWSEGEsQxrRUB2LUFxpk0XjNi3bN
fzicmZR/GE6PzWbuW8PNrJpD2xeD854nw7iVDOEPAKAiKCSlFUoQ3tpJr8cbsoJG
nvIYZ8oMqYg=
=V+hj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Mate Wierdl wrote:
>
> Can a CNAME in an MX record cause a problem for qmail?
> I mean, our sysadm set up
>
> cs.memphis.edu preference = 10, mail exchanger = mx.cs.memphis.edu
>
> where mx.cs.memphis.edu is an alias.
>
> If it can, how exactly?
>
> Thx
>
> Mate
Grab O'Reilly & Associate DNS & Bind (The one with the grasshopper) and
goto Chaper 5 page 97
Quote
... Unless you always use canconical names in your MX records theres' no
guarantee a mailer will always be able to find it self in the MX list,
and you run the risk of having your mail loop......
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 01:34:32PM -0600, Mate Wierdl wrote:
> Can a CNAME in an MX record cause a problem for qmail?
> I mean, our sysadm set up
>
> cs.memphis.edu preference = 10, mail exchanger = mx.cs.memphis.edu
>
> where mx.cs.memphis.edu is an alias.
>
> If it can, how exactly?
Yes. CNAME can definitively cause trouble.
Professor Bernstein explains this here:
http://cr.yp.to/im/cname.html
/magnus - being nice pointing out documentation ;-)
--
http://x42.com/
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 12:44:24PM -0700, Scott D. Yelich wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> Sigh.
>
> Here we go again.
>
> Scott
Thx, so how will qmail get confused ?
Mate
On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 05:04:36PM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
> I see BIND complaining about MX records pointing to CNAMES all the time, but
> I've never had a problem with qmail failing to deliver to any of those hosts
> AFAIK.
Now, having a CNAME in *our* MX could somehow cause trouble to remote
mailers which try to deliver to our domain? Reading the BIND book, it
seemed that the only problem that can happen is with our local
server---which is qmail.
The domain is cs.memphis.edu, and the MX points at mx.cs.memphis.edu
which is an alias only.
Thx
Mate
>
> --Adam
>
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 04:00:27PM -0600, Mate Wierdl wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 17, 2000 at 12:44:24PM -0700, Scott D. Yelich wrote:
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > >
> > > Sigh.
> > >
> > > Here we go again.
> > >
> > > Scott
> >
> > Thx, so how will qmail get confused ?
> >
> > Mate
> >
--
---
Mate Wierdl | Dept. of Math. Sciences | University of Memphis
|
To clear somethings up. I aplogize to
everyone who I offended here, I can relate with people who post here frustated
because their system doesn't work and they are trying to find answers and as
such it annoyes me greatly when people are more willing to put them down then to
help them.
David Sill, your LFQ is one of the best documents
out there, I have it printed and open infront of me when I am working working
with qmail. I wish there were more out there with that level of
detail.
Lee Trotter
Fluid Media
Inc.
-----------------------------
905.523.5898.phone
905.523.5769.fax
www.fluidmedia.com
|
One of the key factors when selecting open source, free and GPL source
software is that you cannot expect to get anything more than what's
provided. If you give, you'll get.
This mailinglist is a loose community of both givers and takers.
Some people need only to find the http://www.qmail.org/ site to get started
and perhaps never even subscribes to this list, some need to read through
every written document about the configuration they need.
Almost every newbie to qmail can get started with the help of the original
FAQ, Dave Sill's Life with qmail, Adam McKennas HOWTO and the other docs
provided here: http://qmail.x42.com/top.html#userdoc
Those who cannot, and those who like to discuss the evolution of qmail
around D.J. Bernsteins other software with updates, patches etc are mixed on
this, very good list.
I think it's rude manner to get on the list, fire off a question answered in
the nearest easily finded doc and then bother to be IRRITATED over people
that take time to answer serious questions here _FOR_FREE!
We do this in our spare time or when somebody else than YOU are paying.
Just because we feel that we get something back.
People are good here.
We have proably some of the most competent qmail people monitoring this
list, including Russell Nelson, Bruce Guenter, Russ Allbery, John Levine,
Fred Lindberg, David Harris, Anand, Len Budney, MrSam,
the Inter7-guys and of course DJB himself. (I've probably missed a lot -
don't spank me). They DO actually take their time in at least browse through
the subjectlines of this list. A lot of them are probably reading every
single mail that is starting a new thread.
We sure answer a lot of simple questions every week. But when often pointing out
existing documentation we're NOT BEING RUDE AT ALL.
OK?
"Share and enjoy"
/magnus
--
http://x42.com/qmail/cookbook/
Hello,
Ive read webwave qmail faq and another qmail faq, and i was wondering how to
i setup relay so only
users can send email thru our smtp if its going to a user from our domain...
So what i did was
edit /etc/tcp.smtp and add 207.61.176.194:allow:RELAYCLIENT=""
and then ran tcpmakectl to transfer that into a tcp.smtp.cdb and then in rc,
i added
/usr/local/bin/tcpcontrol /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb,
so now, noone can send mail thru our smtp if its not our domain right??? if
not, please help
i appreciate it.
Thank you.
Jonathan Fortin, Network Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------
Revelex Canada
6830 Park Avenue Suite 209
Montreal,Qc
H3N 1W7
business: (514) 274-5120 ext. 228
cellular: (514) 242-7325
Quoting Jonathan Fortin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Ive read webwave qmail faq and another qmail faq, and i was wondering how to
> i setup relay so only
> users can send email thru our smtp if its going to a user from our domain...
Hey, looks like you have been reading that thread :)
> edit /etc/tcp.smtp and add 207.61.176.194:allow:RELAYCLIENT=""
So, this is close, but no cigar. Attention to detail and all that.
If your network is 207.61.176.0/24 then you'll want this:
207.61.176.:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
Listing a specific IP address will only allow relaying from exactly
that address.
> and then ran tcpmakectl to transfer that into a tcp.smtp.cdb and then in rc,
> i added
> /usr/local/bin/tcpcontrol /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb,
That's the wrong program (don't know what that is...). Should be:
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb [ rest of command line args ]
Aaron
Pretty much the same question, but asked in a much better way.
In RC, you want something more like
tcpserver -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb -u $UID -g $GID 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
&
at least that is the way that we did it this weekend. We also setup our
/etc/tcp.smtp file to have
10.1.1.252:allow,RELAYCLIENT=""
since that is the addresse that our CCmail server is on, relaying through Qmail
is only allowed for that IP, thus that domain. It worked out pretty well.
BTW, this is on redhat Linux 6.1 with all the latest patches , Kernel version
2.2.12-20. and CCmail release 8.4
Jason Baker
Hello,
I'm trying to set up qmail (pop3d) with a single user and I'm getting the following
error in syslog:
delivery 17: failure: Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/
I followed the directions at http://www.tibus.net/pgregg/projects/
I created 'popuser', here is the /etc/passwd entry:
popuser:x:612:617::/usr/home/popuser:/bin/sh
In /var/qmail/users/assign I have:
=makina-domena-com-potis:popuser:612:617:/usr/local/popaccounts/makina-domena-com/potis:::
.
'potis' is a 'fake' user (for mail delivery and reading email via POP)
Directory /usr/local/popaccounts/makina-domena-com/potis is owned by popuser.popuser.
Also:
-rw-r--r-- 1 popuser popuser 11 Mar 17 16:44 .qmail
drwx------ 5 popuser popuser 1024 Mar 17 15:04 Maildir/
Am I missing something?
Thanks,
Otis
______________________________________________
Get free e-mail at http://www.britannica.com
On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 08:34:09PM -0000, Gabriel Ambuehl wrote:
> I'm searching for an easy solution to operate two servers using qmail that
> have both the exact same mails on them (so some kind of mirroring) to ensure
> the mails don't get killed when one server fails. I understand, that this is
> normally done with RAID 1 or 5 systems, but since we use just basic
> webservers without RAID systems (but much of them) we'd prefer a system with
> two machines much more as this would also help increase general reability. I
> know that I can use one server as secondary which get's the mails if primary
> isn't responding but I'm looking for two servers with the same mails on it
> (eg. just like RAID 1, but with two different machines instead of just two
> harddrives). Has anyone got some infos about such a task?
http://www.resilience.com
John
Hello there.
Recently, most mail is kept in the queue with the following error in the
log:
953345547.577072 delivery 1: deferral:
/bin/sh:_-c:_line_2:_syntax_error:_unexpected_end_of_file/
Ok, the reason is obvious... if I look at the file in the queue
(/var/qmail/queue/local/22/46206 for example) with an editor (vi), it tells
me "incomplete last line"
Now,
1) if i edit that file to make the line valid an then ALRM qmail-send... the
mail goes to nirvana (gone!)
--> 2) why did it start not putting anymore valid last lines here... <--
Any clue??
Regards,
J.M. Roth
________________________________________________________
On Sat, Mar 18, 2000 at 03:20:40AM +0100, J.M. Roth iip" wrote:
> Hello there.
>
> Recently, most mail is kept in the queue with the following error in the
> log:
> 953345547.577072 delivery 1: deferral:
> /bin/sh:_-c:_line_2:_syntax_error:_unexpected_end_of_file/
You've missed a crucial line here. The one that says "starting delivery
to local blah..."
Whatever blah is, the mail is being delivered to some program via
a .qmail file and that program/shell is not coping with the contents
of the email.
Whatever program it is, it's not a part of qmail, it's a part of
a local setup.
> Ok, the reason is obvious... if I look at the file in the queue
> (/var/qmail/queue/local/22/46206 for example) with an editor (vi), it tells
> me "incomplete last line"
>
> Now,
> 1) if i edit that file to make the line valid an then ALRM qmail-send... the
> mail goes to nirvana (gone!)
> --> 2) why did it start not putting anymore valid last lines here... <--
>
> Any clue??
Fix the program to cope with these contents?
Regards.
I'm running a Linux box as my mail server running qmail and a patched
version of the IMAP 4.5 server that supports Maildirs. I have a lot of
mail:
my Maildir has 5086 messages in it to be precise. Recently (i.e., in the
last 500 messages or so) retreiving mail has become *painfully* slow.
Looking at "top," I find that imapd is choking the CPU, taking 97% of the
CPU just to open a mail message. Huh? Wasn't a Maildir supposed to solve
this? Or is this a fundamental filesysem problem (I'm using ext2fs)? What
might be going on? (I have plenty of memory and imapd is only using
2Mb -- it's not a swapping issue.)
Respectfully Submitted,
-david weekly
