qmail Digest 6 Aug 2001 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 1448
Topics (messages 67308 through 67337):
qmail-pop3d and /var/spool/mail
67308 by: Severin Olloz
67309 by: Lukas Beeler
67310 by: Henning Brauer
67313 by: Peter van Dijk
Automatic BCC of all outgoing mail
67311 by: Steve
67312 by: Balazs Nagy
67316 by: Charles Cazabon
Maildir/cur folder question
67314 by: Randolph S. Kahle
67315 by: Peter van Dijk
Procmail+qmail
67317 by: Seby
67318 by: Charles Cazabon
qmailanalog awk: division by zero
67319 by: martin
67320 by: Lukas Beeler
67321 by: martin
problem compiling
67322 by: Tib
67330 by: andrew.tic.ch
67333 by: Tib
Dan, how do we solve this problem?
67323 by: Russell Nelson
67326 by: Steve Reed
67328 by: Greg White
67332 by: Chris Hardie
Nothing at Port 25?
67324 by: Alex Le Fevre
67327 by: Alex Pennace
67329 by: Chris Hardie
rblsmtpd and rblplus?
67325 by: John R. Levine
Serialmail send problem
67331 by: qmail2.col7.metta.lk
Re: Qmail IMAP4 for Maildir - best one??
67334 by: arnie
qmail-spawn_unable_to_fork._
67335 by: Himanshu Kulkarni
67337 by: Henning Brauer
Re: rblsmtpd and mail-abuse.org's DNS servers
67336 by: John R. Levine
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I want to migrate my sendmail-server to qmail.
I have to decide to use /var/spool/mail with |/usr/sbin/qmail-procmail to
store the mails on the server.
But the qmail-pop3-server doesn't work. I use this command-line for the
server:
tcpserver 0 110 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup servername /usr/bin/checkpassword
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d /var/spool/mail
But ther's always this error-message when I want to fetch the mails:
-ERR unable to scan $HOME/Maildir
So I try the pop3lite-server and then it works perfectly.
Is this normal that the qmail-pop3d doesn't work with the /var/spool/mail
directory or must I hack the code?
What's the best solution? Use a other pop3-server!?
Any ideas?
Thnaks!
Severin Olloz
At 14:28 05.08.2001 +0200, Severin Olloz wrote:
>Any ideas?
qmail-pop3d supports only maildir spools.
use gnu-pop3d, qpopper or similar to pop your vms
--
--/-/------ Lukas Beeler ---- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------\-\--
\ \ My HomePage: <URL:http://www.projectdream.org> / /
On Sun, Aug 05, 2001 at 02:28:39PM +0200, Severin Olloz wrote:
> I have to decide to use /var/spool/mail with |/usr/sbin/qmail-procmail to
> store the mails on the server.
> But the qmail-pop3-server doesn't work.
qmail-pop3d does not support any mail storage format asifr from Maildir.
Either switch to maildir (you won't regret it) or use another pop3d.
--
* Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de *
* Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany *
Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
(Dennis Ritchie)
On Sun, Aug 05, 2001 at 02:28:39PM +0200, Severin Olloz wrote:
> I want to migrate my sendmail-server to qmail.
>
> I have to decide to use /var/spool/mail with |/usr/sbin/qmail-procmail to
> store the mails on the server.
mbox or Maildir format? Both are perfectly possible in /var/spool/mail
(we currently do Maildir in /var/spool/mail as well).
If mbox: qmail-pop3d can't do it. If Maildir: get a checkpassword
module that understands /var/spool/mail. I don't know if any are
readily available.
Greetz, Peter
--
Against Free Sex! http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html
Does anyone know how to automatically send a copy of all outgoing email from
all addresses on a qmail machine to a remote address (e.g. for legal
compliance) - or just to save it locally in the log, and to do this without
requiring a recompile of qmail?
Steve Leeke
On Sun, Aug 05 2001, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does anyone know how to automatically send a copy of all outgoing email from
> all addresses on a qmail machine to a remote address (e.g. for legal
> compliance) - or just to save it locally in the log, and to do this without
> requiring a recompile of qmail?
With no testing:
cd /var/qmail/bin
mv qmail-rspawn qmail-rspawn.orig
echo '#!/bin/sh' > qmail-rspawn
echo 'tee /var/log/outgoing-emails | /var/qmail/bin/qmail-rspawn.orig' >> qmail-respawn
chown root:qmail qmail-rspawn
chmod 711 qmail-rspawn
Maybe it does what you want.
---jul
Please don't introduce an unrelated topic by replying to an existing
thread. It screws up threading in the archives and our MUAs.
Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does anyone know how to automatically send a copy of all outgoing email from
> all addresses on a qmail machine to a remote address (e.g. for legal
> compliance) - or just to save it locally in the log, and to do this without
> requiring a recompile of qmail?
Without recompiling? You'd have to play games with
~alias/.qmail-default and virtualdomains, probably. But djb provided
for exactly this with QUEUE_EXTRA. See the FAQ. Recompiling is
trivial.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have noticed that sometimes email messages will appear in the
/Maildir/cur folder that have the format:
<number>.<number>.<machine>.<domain-name>;2,
I believe they also have ownership set to root:root.
When this happens, then email clients (such as Netscape) get "stuck" and
retrieve the same message over and over again. To "fix" this, I have to
copy the files back to the /Maildir/new folder, change ownership, and
remove the ":2," from the file name.
What is the purpose of the /Maildir/cur folder?
Why are email message left in this folder?
Is there a better way to handle this the next time it occurs?
Randy
On Sun, Aug 05, 2001 at 08:35:05AM -0700, Randolph S. Kahle wrote:
> I have noticed that sometimes email messages will appear in the
> /Maildir/cur folder that have the format:
>
> <number>.<number>.<machine>.<domain-name>;2,
This is normal.
> I believe they also have ownership set to root:root.
This is not normal. You have a misconfiguration or you are using buggy
software.
> When this happens, then email clients (such as Netscape) get "stuck" and
> retrieve the same message over and over again. To "fix" this, I have to
> copy the files back to the /Maildir/new folder, change ownership, and
> remove the ":2," from the file name.
>
> What is the purpose of the /Maildir/cur folder?
It saves any messages that have been read at least once, but not
deleted.
> Why are email message left in this folder?
Because a client retrieved a message without deleting it.
> Is there a better way to handle this the next time it occurs?
Find out what's wrong with your setup. The behaviour you describe
(especially the root ownership) is not normal.
Greetz, Peter
--
Against Free Sex! http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html
Hy,
How can i make this work fine, i don't want procmail to write
there how can i disable this behavior...
success: procmail:_Couldn't_create_"/var/spool/mail/linux"/did_0+0+1/
Thankyou,
Seby...
Seby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> How can i make this work fine, i don't want procmail to write
> there how can i disable this behavior...
>
> success: procmail:_Couldn't_create_"/var/spool/mail/linux"/did_0+0+1/
Try asking on a procmail list, or see the procmail documentation.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello.
I`ve set up qmailanalog to send the success, failures and deferrals to my
by e-mail.
It does this quite well but....
The timings ddelay, average ddelay, xdelay all show 0.000000 which is
obviously not correct as there are 1281 total delivery attempts, 698
success, 197 failures & 386 deferrals.
Further, get a message sent to me saying :-
awk: division by zero
input record number 2674, file
source line number 60
Can someone give me a hint so I can start tracking this error down.
Regards...Martin
At 16:45 05.08.2001 -0400, martin wrote:
>Can someone give me a hint so I can start tracking this error down.
you didn't convert the timestamps into fractional seconds
look at qmail.org for a programm called tai64nfrac that converts the timestamps
--
--/-/------ Lukas Beeler ---- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------\-\--
\ \ My HomePage: <URL:http://www.projectdream.org> / /
At 10:50 PM 8/5/2001 +0200, you wrote:
>At 16:45 05.08.2001 -0400, martin wrote:
>>Can someone give me a hint so I can start tracking this error down.
>you didn't convert the timestamps into fractional seconds
>look at qmail.org for a programm called tai64nfrac that converts the
>timestamps
>--
>--/-/------ Lukas Beeler ---- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------\-\--
> \ \ My HomePage: <URL:http://www.projectdream.org> / /
>
Hello Lukas..thanks.
The www.qmail.org site is still down as is www.faqts.com
I`ve found another tai64nfrac and will look into trying it tonight or
tomorrow.
Thanks again.
Regards...Martin
When compiling, I get the following text after running 'make setup check'.
This is on a solaris 8 box.
What happened?
<EOL>
Tib
#make setup check
( cat warn-auto.sh; \
echo CC=\'`head -1 conf-cc`\'; \
echo LD=\'`head -1 conf-ld`\' \
) > auto-ccld.sh
cat auto-ccld.sh make-load.sh > make-load
chmod 755 make-load
cat auto-ccld.sh find-systype.sh > find-systype
chmod 755 find-systype
./find-systype > systype
( cat warn-auto.sh; ./make-load "`cat systype`" ) > load
chmod 755 load
cat auto-ccld.sh make-compile.sh > make-compile
chmod 755 make-compile
( cat warn-auto.sh; ./make-compile "`cat systype`" ) > \
compile
chmod 755 compile
( ( ./compile tryvfork.c && ./load tryvfork ) >/dev/null \
2>&1 \
&& cat fork.h2 || cat fork.h1 ) > fork.h
rm -f tryvfork.o tryvfork
./compile qmail-local.c
qmail-local.c:1: sys/types.h: No such file or directory
qmail-local.c:2: sys/stat.h: No such file or directory
make: *** [qmail-local.o] Error 1
Hi Tib,
> When compiling, I get the following text...
> ...This is on a solaris 8 box.
I'm fairly sure this is already in the list archive, but
briefly, for Solaris you should avoid Sun's compiler
and use gcc (Gnu compiler) instead. You may still
find that some include files are not where the source
code expects them, but this is trivial to fix - just find
the real locations.
cheers,
Andrew.
Actually that was using gcc. It tried to find a 'cc' program so I linked
over gcc to where it was expecting cc.
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi Tib,
>
> > When compiling, I get the following text...
> > ...This is on a solaris 8 box.
>
> I'm fairly sure this is already in the list archive, but
> briefly, for Solaris you should avoid Sun's compiler
> and use gcc (Gnu compiler) instead. You may still
> find that some include files are not where the source
> code expects them, but this is trivial to fix - just find
> the real locations.
>
> cheers,
>
> Andrew.
>
>
A user on this mailing list has a problem. He has a fast non-static
IP ADSL connection, which is listed on the DUL. The non-default route
was a slow second internet connection with a static IP and which was
not listed on the DUL. He has several choices that I can see:
1) Try to get his fast connection removed from the DUL. That's not
acceptable since he doesn't have a fixed IP address.
2) Let his SMTP client connections go out from the IP address on the
DUL. This isn't acceptable because anybody subscribing to the DUL
will reject his email.
3) Use a wildcard smtproutes entry to redirect his email to his ISP's
email relay. This isn't acceptable because he doesn't want to have to
trust his ISP. He wants to be able to look in his log files and know
that the email has been accepted by the recipient's SMTP server.
4) He could change the default route to point to the slow connection.
Obviously unacceptable.
5) He simply MUST convince qmail-remote to bind to the IP address of
the slow non-DUL interface. Unfortunately, there is no way to do that
short of patching qmail. Why should he have to patch qmail in order
to add a feature he needs? As you've said yourself, the problem with
people offering patches is that you don't get an indication of how
many people are using the patch.
6) His only acceptable alternative to patching qmail is to try to
convince you to add this as a feature to qmail. Other people have
tried to get this feature added, and you've called their desire
"frivolous". He doesn't hold out much hope for success.
What should he do? Give up on convincing you and patch qmail?
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok |
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | #exclude <windows.h>
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
Although I'm no expert in qmail (still getting the feet wet
here), I am a network engineer. What this individual really
should do is go back to their ISP and ask for a fixed IP address
that isn't part of a dial-up users group. Trying to run a mail
server - ANY mail server - over a dialup IP is certain to lead
to headaches.
There are, however, other problems to consider. Many mail
servers do a reverse-DNS lookup to verify that the mail is
coming from an address that is a valid MX record. Without a
fixed IP address to bind to an MX record, this mail sysop is
headed for additional troubles.
-Steve
> A user on this mailing list has a problem. He has a fast non-
static
> IP ADSL connection, which is listed on the DUL. The non-
default route
> was a slow second internet connection with a static IP and
which was
> not listed on the DUL. He has several choices that I can see:
>
> 1) Try to get his fast connection removed from the DUL.
That's not
> acceptable since he doesn't have a fixed IP address.
>
> 2) Let his SMTP client connections go out from the IP address
on the
> DUL. This isn't acceptable because anybody subscribing to the
DUL
> will reject his email.
>
> 3) Use a wildcard smtproutes entry to redirect his email to
his ISP's
> email relay. This isn't acceptable because he doesn't want to
have to
> trust his ISP. He wants to be able to look in his log files
and know
> that the email has been accepted by the recipient's SMTP
server.
>
> 4) He could change the default route to point to the slow
connection.
> Obviously unacceptable.
>
> 5) He simply MUST convince qmail-remote to bind to the IP
address of
> the slow non-DUL interface. Unfortunately, there is no way to
do that
> short of patching qmail. Why should he have to patch qmail in
order
> to add a feature he needs? As you've said yourself, the
problem with
> people offering patches is that you don't get an indication of
how
> many people are using the patch.
>
> 6) His only acceptable alternative to patching qmail is to try
to
> convince you to add this as a feature to qmail. Other people
have
> tried to get this feature added, and you've called their desire
> "frivolous". He doesn't hold out much hope for success.
>
> What should he do? Give up on convincing you and patch qmail?
>
> --
> -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
> Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok |
> 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | #exclude
<windows.h>
> Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
>
On Sun, Aug 05, 2001 at 10:35:50PM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote:
> A user on this mailing list has a problem. He has a fast non-static
> IP ADSL connection, which is listed on the DUL. The non-default route
> was a slow second internet connection with a static IP and which was
> not listed on the DUL. He has several choices that I can see:
>
> 1) Try to get his fast connection removed from the DUL. That's not
> acceptable since he doesn't have a fixed IP address.
>
> 2) Let his SMTP client connections go out from the IP address on the
> DUL. This isn't acceptable because anybody subscribing to the DUL
> will reject his email.
>
> 3) Use a wildcard smtproutes entry to redirect his email to his ISP's
> email relay. This isn't acceptable because he doesn't want to have to
> trust his ISP. He wants to be able to look in his log files and know
> that the email has been accepted by the recipient's SMTP server.
>
> 4) He could change the default route to point to the slow connection.
> Obviously unacceptable.
>
> 5) He simply MUST convince qmail-remote to bind to the IP address of
> the slow non-DUL interface. Unfortunately, there is no way to do that
> short of patching qmail. Why should he have to patch qmail in order
> to add a feature he needs? As you've said yourself, the problem with
> people offering patches is that you don't get an indication of how
> many people are using the patch.
>
> 6) His only acceptable alternative to patching qmail is to try to
> convince you to add this as a feature to qmail. Other people have
> tried to get this feature added, and you've called their desire
> "frivolous". He doesn't hold out much hope for success.
And, of course,
7) Use operating system features to ensure that all outbound traffic to
port 25 goes out the slower interface. This should be trivial with
ipfilter/ipnat, ipfw/natd or the Linux-packet-filter-and-nat of the week,
no?
This does not strike me as too large a hoop to jump through for such a
specialized need, and should work flawlessly once configured.
Not trying to make your point invalid, as I do think that this code, if
reviewed, should be simple enough to integrate in the source. Just
trying to point out another option.
P.S. If inegration is going to happen, I wouldn't mind seeing the
ipme.c/0.0.0.0 patch in place, either. I _know_ the OS is supposed to
DTRT with it, but this wouldn't be the first time Dan has had to work
around a braindead decision by authors of other OSs. :)
--
Greg White
After reading some initial responses to this, I thought it was worth
asking for clarification: (4) and (5) together would indicate that the
user wants to use his "ownership" of the slow connection's IP address as a
source for the mail, but wants to deliver it via tha fast DUL-listed
connection. Is that the problem we're addressing?
If not, please disregard the babble below.
If so, it seems that any solution allowing this will cause problems (in
this particular case, anyway) at the point his upstream ISP (on the fast
side) checks that the packets coming down the pipe are from a valid IP
address (i.e. one that is supposed to be located on that side of that
pipe). Anything less secure would seem to encourage IP spoofing.
On a less technical note, it seems that addressing the state of being
listed in a DUL by patching/modifying/changing software won't ever scale
well. The purpose of blocking lists and their use by ISPs is to actively
and immediately discourage mail abuse AND to make end-users aware of what
their ISPs are facilitating. Without knowing all the circumstances
involved, I think the user should take (1) a little farther; just because
he/she doesn't have a fixed IP doesn't mean that he/she can't pursue the
issue with the ISP. It's true that they may be unable to respond
adequately, but making some noise about the issue seems like a lower risk
than, well, asking Dan to add a feature to qmail. :)
Chris
On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, Russell Nelson wrote:
> A user on this mailing list has a problem. He has a fast non-static
> IP ADSL connection, which is listed on the DUL. The non-default route
> was a slow second internet connection with a static IP and which was
> not listed on the DUL. He has several choices that I can see:
>
> 1) Try to get his fast connection removed from the DUL. That's not
> acceptable since he doesn't have a fixed IP address.
>
> 2) Let his SMTP client connections go out from the IP address on the
> DUL. This isn't acceptable because anybody subscribing to the DUL
> will reject his email.
>
> 3) Use a wildcard smtproutes entry to redirect his email to his ISP's
> email relay. This isn't acceptable because he doesn't want to have to
> trust his ISP. He wants to be able to look in his log files and know
> that the email has been accepted by the recipient's SMTP server.
>
> 4) He could change the default route to point to the slow connection.
> Obviously unacceptable.
>
> 5) He simply MUST convince qmail-remote to bind to the IP address of
> the slow non-DUL interface. Unfortunately, there is no way to do that
> short of patching qmail. Why should he have to patch qmail in order
> to add a feature he needs? As you've said yourself, the problem with
> people offering patches is that you don't get an indication of how
> many people are using the patch.
>
> 6) His only acceptable alternative to patching qmail is to try to
> convince you to add this as a feature to qmail. Other people have
> tried to get this feature added, and you've called their desire
> "frivolous". He doesn't hold out much hope for success.
>
> What should he do? Give up on convincing you and patch qmail?
>
>
-- Chris Hardie -----------------------------
----- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------
-------- http://www.summersault.com/chris/ --
Hello all,
This weekend I attempted to upgrade my system from
OpenBSD 2.8 -> 2.9. I had a bit of trouble doing so,
and as such had to do some strange OS manipulation
that does not bear description here.
In any case, after getting to what I thought was a
fully restored point, my inbound mail is not working.
This despite the fact that I have qmail running under
tcpserver, as revealed by ps:
qmaild 3828 0.0 0.3 60 444 C0- S 10:36PM
0:00.04 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -u 1012 -g 1011
-x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
I also have qmail-lspawn, qmail-rspawn, and
qmail-clean running.
I can't even telnet to port 25 on the system; it tells
me it's connected, then immediately dumps me out. I've
posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to see if it could possibly
be the OS shutting down the port, but I suspect
something is wrong with the qmail daemon.
Does anyone here know if I've got things right from
the Qmail end? Thanks.
Alex Le Fevre
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
On Sun, Aug 05, 2001 at 07:36:02PM -0700, Alex Le Fevre wrote:
> In any case, after getting to what I thought was a
> fully restored point, my inbound mail is not working.
> This despite the fact that I have qmail running under
> tcpserver, as revealed by ps:
>
> qmaild 3828 0.0 0.3 60 444 C0- S 10:36PM
> 0:00.04 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -u 1012 -g 1011
> -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
[snip]
> I can't even telnet to port 25 on the system; it tells
> me it's connected, then immediately dumps me out. I've
> posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to see if it could possibly
> be the OS shutting down the port, but I suspect
> something is wrong with the qmail daemon.
What are the contents of /etc/tcp.smtp?
Depending on what you meant by "OS manipulation", the following
troubleshooting steps might be valid:
-See what's in your /etc/tcp.smtp file - make sure you're allowing
connections and that the tcprules database has been rebuilt properly.
-You say you can't telnet, but that you do get some sign of connection.
You should clarify what is actually happening here. If the packets are
being rejected at the network level, you've got a non-qmail configuration
issue.
-See what's in your mail logs. If qmail-smtpd is getting the connection,
but something is going wrong, it will log an error telling you about it.
-If there is something wrong with qmail, a "make setup check" from the
source tree will usually do wonders, especially after an OS upgrade with
strange manipulation.
Hope this helps,
Chris
On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, Alex Le Fevre wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> This weekend I attempted to upgrade my system from
> OpenBSD 2.8 -> 2.9. I had a bit of trouble doing so,
> and as such had to do some strange OS manipulation
> that does not bear description here.
>
> In any case, after getting to what I thought was a
> fully restored point, my inbound mail is not working.
> This despite the fact that I have qmail running under
> tcpserver, as revealed by ps:
>
> qmaild 3828 0.0 0.3 60 444 C0- S 10:36PM
> 0:00.04 /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -v -u 1012 -g 1011
> -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd
>
> I also have qmail-lspawn, qmail-rspawn, and
> qmail-clean running.
>
> I can't even telnet to port 25 on the system; it tells
> me it's connected, then immediately dumps me out. I've
> posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to see if it could possibly
> be the OS shutting down the port, but I suspect
> something is wrong with the qmail daemon.
>
> Does anyone here know if I've got things right from
> the Qmail end? Thanks.
>
> Alex Le Fevre
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
> http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
>
-- Chris Hardie -----------------------------
----- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------
-------- http://www.summersault.com/chris/ --
Has anyone modified rblsmtpd to work with MAPS' rbl-plus? It's
a merged RBL, RSS, and DUL with the particular list(s) an address
is on being determined by bits in the low part.
The changes I'd want to rblsmtpd would be 1) tell which bits to pay
attention to and which not tom since I reject RBL and RSS mail, but send
DUL mail into a spam trap, and 2) provide default TXT messages to use
depending on which bits are set.
It's not all that hard to do, but I'd rather not do it if someone else
already has. I see nothing about rbl-plus in the archives yet.
--
John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl,
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
Hi all,
I have installed qmail and serialmail and everything is working.
My setup is as follows
metta.lk
______
| | ---------to the InterNet.
|______|
|
modem dial-up to my Internet box
|
|
______
| | _________ local LAN col7.metta.lk
|______|
| ||||
several modems for
user dial in
When col7.metta.lk dial into metta.lk and send the mail it is going OK,
but when the connection from metta.lk to the Internet is down then the
mail is not going out of col7.metta.lk
I would like metta.lk to first of all accept mail from col7.metta.lk
and then for metta.lk to send the mail out to the Internet whenever
possible.
This is a recurrent problem as the Internet connection often is down on Sat
and then only come up again on Mon morning due to many reasons beyond my
control
Thanks in advance.
Mettavihari
--------------------------------------------
A saying of the Buddha from http://metta.lk/
--------------------------------------------
He, who speaks much is not the one well versed in the Law. He, who hears the Law and
practices what he has learnt is the one who knows the Law.
Random Dhammapada Verse 259
Roger Arnold wrote:
Great one Tony,
Thank God that someone else thinks some (not all) people on this list are real
Jerks, would like to use stronger language but am trying to be polite.
A lot of the experts read the title and glance at the request, and then set
about running the person that asked into the ground by making un called for
remarks about why the question asked, when they think all the answers are in the
archives etc., without finding out what the question was really about.
Also many of the answers in the archives often don't answer what the searcher
was after (such as your query) and further answers are needed, which take many
hours rather than seconds to find, if at all.
One of the main reasons that I stay away from lists to do with qmail is because
of the attitude of a lot of these type of people, which if they don't want to
help, they would be best not to answer at all.
Regards
Roger
Tony Harris wrote:
> Thank you for such a wonderfully nice short response.
>
> I'm sorry if I sound like a jerk, but I had read several were out there -
> and I had read on here some people complaining about slowness and some
> moving from courier to UW, and some moving from UW to courier.
>
> I HAD searched the archives - most of the ones that had to do with opinions
> of IMAP that I saw were several months old - as you know software can change
> fast with new features and better stability.
>
> Reading the base faq (which I DID DO):
>
> 5.2.4. imap-maildir
> David R. Harris has cleaned up the patch that adds maildir support to the
> University of Washington IMAP server and documented the installation
> process. See http://www.davideous.com/imap-maildir/.
>
> 5.2.5. Courier-IMAP
> Sam Varshavchik has written an IMAP server that supports maildir mailboxes
> only. It's available from http://www.inter7.com/courierimap/.
>
> And I did not read *your* FAQ because I do not use QMail-LDAP - actually I
> use a combination of sendmail and qmail for the mail solution, so forgive me
> for not wanting to make a switch to move everything into an LDAP style
> solution.
>
> So, before you jump down someones throat for something you ASSUME (ie: not
> doing homework) - check first.
>
> -Tony
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 3:33 PM
> Subject: Re: Qmail IMAP4 for Maildir - best one??
>
> > On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 09:35:05PM -0500, Tony Harris wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm looking at using a webmail program that requires the use of
> MAPv4 - I
> > > see there are various imap packages available that works with qmail -
> which
> > > is really the most stable and seems to work the best with IMAP?
> >
> > How many seconds did you spent in searching the archives, reading
> > lifewithqmail.org and qmail.org?
> > In short: courier is the preferred one for most of us.
> >
> > > I'm looking at trying out squirrelmail (so any other tips one might be
> able
> > > to offer would be greatly appreciated as well ;)
> >
> > squirrel is fine, sqwebmail too.
> > I've written a short pargraph about the two in
> www.lifewithqmail.org/ldap/.
> >
> > Please do your homework next time.
> >
> > --
> > * Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de *
> > * Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany *
> > Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
> > (Dennis Ritchie)
> >
> >
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.265 / Virus Database: 137 - Release Date: 7/18/01
Hi All
I am getting qmail-spawn_unable_to_fork._ error on my qmail server
..which is running on Linux 2.2.12-20 .... we are user IBM LDAP Server which is
running on a different RS6000 server with AIX as operating system .....
I serched thro' archieves of mailing list for this error. These mails
suggest that this is error on Linux server ....
However on mail server I have seen at any point of time the netstat
shows me almost 100 connections with LDAP server in "TIME_WAIT" state ...
against 10 odd connections in established state ... that means qmail server is
unable to close the connection with LDAP server ...
I am not getting any errors in error messages of Linux and in the
maillog I am getting only above mentioned error ... i.e.
qmail-spawn_unable_to_fork._ ....
regards
Himanshu
Himanshu Kulkarni
B202, Nirmal Tower,
Mira Road (E), Dist. Thane
Pin 401107, Maharashtra
India
Ph. 91 22 8110195
-------------------------------------------------------
Keeping in touch keeps friendship growing
-------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 12:00:43PM +0530, Himanshu Kulkarni wrote:
> Hi All
>
> I am getting qmail-spawn_unable_to_fork._ error on my qmail server
This looks like a ressource limit issue. man ulimit, upper -n and -p.
--
* Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de *
* Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany *
Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity.
(Dennis Ritchie)
>2) Did you actually pay MAPS for use of their mail-abuse.org
>servers? They started charging on August 1st so you are
>not going to have much luck using them to block spam if you
>aren't paying them.
Have you looked at the price list? The price for individual users is
$0. If you want to keep using the RBL, RSS, an DUL, they want a
written agreement from you, but if you can't afford to pay, they don't
demand money.
--
John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl,
Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
