Re: Please permanently block *@lists.debian.org from your mailing lists: [info@bairestrade.com: canned peach in syrup x 850 grs.]
On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 12:34:50AM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote: > Bairestrade: > > Someone is apparently subscribing one or more mailing lists at > @lists.debian.org to your mailing lists. These relate to a > computer-related project, the Debian GNU/Linux distribution, which has > no interest in your mailing lists. > > This has been reported to several spam reporting agencies and your > upstream ISP as spam. > > Please ensure that *NO* addresses matching the pattern > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" can be subscribed to your mailing lists. > > You may wish to review your choice of mailing list software which > apparently allows subscription and/or unsubscription merely by viewing a > link. These links are now posted to several archives and newsgroups on > which Debian, and can be used by anyone worldwide. This presents > certain problems as I'm sure you can understand. I would strongly > recommend disabling this functionality of your software. > > > Peace. > 'lo, "From: canned peach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" is now banned on our (Debian's) end. Cheers, Pasc pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Your debian-user@lists.debian.org subscription has been terminated
Hi, On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 06:42:38PM +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote: > From whom were 1478 messages received? What kind of messages are these? There was a bug in reaper.pl which removes bouncing email addresses. That should have been just 1, which as it was under that period's threshold would not have resulted in an unsubscription. I've also fixed up the message a little so it makes more sense. > > For your convenience, we have attached the final bounce message > > which caused your address to be removed from the list. > > Take a look at that message - it is SPAM! (At least I suppose it is, > since I can't read Japanese/Chinese/Korean characters.) I bounce spam > during the SMTP conversation. If you can't filter the damn stuff out > before sending it to me, at least don't unsubscribe me for not taking > it! If the bounce handler could reliably tell that something was spam, we wouldn't be using it as a bounce handler but as a spam checker. ;-) You shouldn't be bounced from debian-users now unless you reach the threshold (for real this time). > > This message has been generated by reaper.pl (0.16). It's up to 0.17 now ;-) Cheers, Pasc Listmaster -- Pascal Hakim +61-403-411-672 "Do not bend." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Who unsubscribed me from this list?
I did. =-) On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 10:06:43AM -0400, David P James wrote: > I've not been receiving email from this list for a few days now. It > appears I was unsubscribed somehow. You were. >From the log file: Tue Oct 21 12:18:25 2003: debian-user:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with 266/295 This means you bounced 266 messages in a 24 hour period in which 295 messages were sent out on the list. As this is an over 80% failure rate, the bounce-handler decided to kick you off. Note that the current bounce handler is much more lenient than the one which was in place a couple of weeks back, with which you would have been kicked off after only 40 bounces or so... > I suppose I know why. My inbox was getting filled up and was probably > bouncing messages. Before I was dropped, there was a thread about spam > from this list. I've got that plus viruses it seems. I was getting > upwards of 15MB of virus emails per day to a 10MB account. All it takes > is to have a broken connection for half day (or night) when you're not > arround to check on it for things to overfill. But my brother and > father (same ISP) don't get that volume of virus emails since neither > is subscribed to this list. That's right... <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Please reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you feel this message to be in error. > I'm not pleased that legit emails were probably being bounced but there > is a degree of irony in being dropped from the very list that must have > been the source of the address harvesting that led to the virus > spamming in the first place. We can't stop people who are infected from being subscribed on the list. We don't control any of the mail->news gateways The only thing we could change are the list archives, and no one seems to agree on what should be done, whether addresses should be hidden or not, whether addresses should be obfuscated and so on. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim +61-403-411-672 "Do not bend." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Who unsubscribed me from this list?
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 12:37:39AM +1000, Pascal Hakim wrote: > That's right... > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Please reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > if you feel this message to be in error. > Gah. That was a mouse-o... It should have been: Content-Type: text/plain This Message was undeliverable due to the following reason: The user(s) account is temporarily over quota. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Please reply to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you feel this message to be in error. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim +61-403-411-672 "Do not bend." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mailing list
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:47:08PM +0100, Richard Kimber wrote: > Has this mailing list had problems in the last couple of days? > > Yesterday I found I was not receiving any messages. Today I discovered I > was not subscribed, even though I had not unsubscribed myself. > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/list/bounce-stuff/logs$ grep [EMAIL PROTECTED] *2003-09* verphandler-2003-09-28.log:A:[EMAIL PROTECTED] has hit the breakpoint, marking for removal verphandler-2003-09-28.log:A:[EMAIL PROTECTED] has hit the breakpoint, marking for removal verphandler-2003-09-28.log:A:[EMAIL PROTECTED] has hit the breakpoint, marking for removal verphandler-2003-09-28.log:A:[EMAIL PROTECTED] has hit the breakpoint, marking for removal verphandler-2003-09-28.log:A:[EMAIL PROTECTED] has hit the breakpoint, marking for removal You bounced too many emails, and got removed from the list. It sends you a message when you get removed, so if you didn't get that either, your mailbox was probably full. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim +61-403-411-672 "Do not bend." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mailing list
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 09:42:13PM +0400, Denis Dzyubenko wrote: > Seems that there are some problems with mailing lists at debian.org - > today I received two notifications about bounced messages (btw, why > lists.debian.org send these messages if he think my email server > bounce messages?). Postmaster at e-mail server I am using tell me that > there were no problems with the server, so he thinks problems is > somewhere outside, maybe they are at lists.debian.org ? > > Problem occur only with @lists.debian.org, other maillist servers work > without problems. > You're in luck... I wrote a bit of code last night to keep a copy of the last bounce message we've received from all addresses. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: host relay1.kubtelecom.ru[213.132.64.82] said: 554 Message rejected due to its POSSIBLE SPAM CONTENTS (#5.3.2) The bounce handler just sees that you are bouncing messages. You are not the only one in this situation, there are quite a few other people getting kicked off debian lists because of this problem, but there's no easy solution in sight. We always email out on removing someone, so that people know they are being removed. There could be fake bounce messages being sent, or maybe only some messages bounces. There's no harm in trying to send that information email out. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim +61-403-411-672 "Do not bend." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mailing list
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:58:40AM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> Not true in all cases. If your list mail is being relayed to you from
> somewhere, your own mailbox bouncing messages *won't* unsubscribe you
> from the Debian listslargely because you weren't subscribed in the
> first place.
>
Hey,
This isn't 100% true. In most cases, the bounce-handler
will figure out what address you subscribed with. Each message
being sent out by the list software has a unique Return-path, which
looks something like this:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
If your mail server behaves correctly (99% of cases), it will
respect this header, even when mail is being relayed, and bounces
will work correctly, and get you unsubscribed.
Cheers,
Pasc
--
Pascal Hakim +61-403-411-672
"Do not bend."
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: mailing list
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 04:38:38PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote: > I should know better than to tangle with the list manager, but... I'm not *that* scary ;-) > In this case, it's not the person complaining wh gets unsubscribed, but > the relay address. > > E.g.: > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribes to debian-user. >[EMAIL PROTECTED] is forwarded mail by [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The bounce handler IIUC will be triggered if [EMAIL PROTECTED] starts > bouncing, but is *not* triggered by [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ...or am I missing something? It depends how [EMAIL PROTECTED] is forwarding the mail. The large majority of those relays will only change the envelope, and won't change the Return-path. This means that when the bounce is generated, even if it's bouncing on [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s server, it will get sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], so the unsubscribe will work. If the MX server for faraway.bar ignores the return-path it will usually bounce to the list's posters, which is surprisingly rare. I guess that with some setups, the bounces would be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], but then we'd never hear about it. Have a look at http://cr.yp.to/proto/verp.txt for more info on VERP (Variable Envelope Retun Paths). Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim +61-403-411-672 "Do not bend." pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Testing user-list
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 07:38:34AM -0800, J Y wrote: > Hi, I don't seem to be getting messages from the users list. Sorry about > adding to the traffic. I don't understand this list problem. My inbox > has about 80 messages in it. (It can hold probably 500) I am using > online email. Why I am getting repeatedly dropped/bounced from the > list-if indeed I have been this time-I just don't know. JY 'lo, Most mailbox have a size measures in space taken, rather than just by the number of emails. You're probably getting too many viruses or large attachments which are eating up all your disk quota. When legitimate mail then comes in, there's no room for it, and it gets bounced. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim +61-403-411-672 "Do not bend." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: virus' on the list
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 12:20:55AM -0400, amg wrote: > Hello all, > > Being relatively new to the whole mailing-list scene I have a question > about the linux mailing-list scene actually (actually part of a mailing > list in my windows days). Welcome ;-) > While browsing my inbox, which I only do every several days, I notice > messages from places such as "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" (this was recently, I > received (or it was sent?) it: 03.08.28). > > I am wondering what this is. Did someone send a virus/worm/whatever to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is [EMAIL PROTECTED] a security company > protecting us happy debian users from such a horrible thing? Is this a > common thing (have seen before, but can't remember where/when)? Did > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" mistakingly judge a "normal/safe" message as a threat > to our security, and in the end, choose to inform us about the potential > threat? We do not have a security company protecting us. As a few people have pointed out already, this is probably a case of a virus being sent with a faked From header, and over-zealous anti-virus software. I have added a lot of anti-virus messages to the blacklist, and I'm still adding more, as more messages make it through. While there have been a number of messages getting through, in the month of August, 1304 messages didn't make it through, as they were judged to be either a virus, or an anti-virus message. By contrast, July only had 2 such messages. > afterthought: while on the windows mailing-list, I never received > anything closely related to a "virus warning", which is why I ask the > question now, instead of my pre-Linux days. Having a virus which sends out a message with a fake From header, is a relatively recent thing. Pasc (with his listmaster hat on) -- Pascal Hakim 0411-283-060 "Do not bend." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: list mail filters: was Re: Wicked screensaver
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 07:59:40PM -0600, Jacob Anawalt wrote: > I'm impressed that we didn't see more of a showing of Sobig.F on the > list. What mail rules are inplace other than Spamassasin, or is that > doing it all? > We've added a number of filters after watching what's gotten through. Currently, we have: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/list/.etc$ wc -l rc.local.s10 rc.spam rc.virus 59 rc.local.s10 533 rc.spam 126 rc.virus 718 total [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/list/.etc$ Once comments and whitespace are removed, we've still got over 400 lines worth of checks. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0411-283-060 "Do not bend." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: list mail filters: was Re: Wicked screensaver
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 06:42:11PM +1000, Pascal Hakim wrote: > On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 07:59:40PM -0600, Jacob Anawalt wrote: > > I'm impressed that we didn't see more of a showing of Sobig.F on the > > list. What mail rules are inplace other than Spamassasin, or is that > > doing it all? > > > > We've added a number of filters after watching what's gotten through. > Currently, we have: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/list/.etc$ wc -l rc.local.s10 rc.spam rc.virus > 59 rc.local.s10 > 533 rc.spam > 126 rc.virus > 718 total > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/list/.etc$ > > Once comments and whitespace are removed, we've still got over 400 lines > worth of checks. > And while I'm there... some numbers of the stuff that didn't get through: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/list/junk/debian-user$ grep -c "^From " *2003-08 assassinated.2003-08:3449 crossassassinated.2003-08:701 killed-r0.2003-08:620 rcdotspam.2003-08:14 spamfiltered.2003-08:2 viruspam.2003-08:1690 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/list/junk/debian-user$ grep -c "^From " *2003-09 assassinated.2003-09:213 crossassassinated.2003-09:82 killed-r0.2003-09:146 rcdotspam.2003-09:4 viruspam.2003-09:127 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/list/junk/debian-user$ assassinated is the stuff that spamassassing caught. viruspam is all the virus that were sent, and the anti-virus messages that we caught. The rest are the various anti-spam rules that we have... Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0411-283-060 "Do not bend." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why am I no longer receiving the digest?
On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 12:15:09AM +0100, Pigeon wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 02:25:06AM +0100, Pigeon wrote: > > It still ain't working, and www.faqchest.com is not receiving digests > > either. > > Now we're in the middle of June and it STILL doesn't F**G WORK... I've > checked www.faqchest.com again - sure enough, since March 30th they > have not received a debian-user digest either. If anyone on this list > knows the listmaster, please could you kick his arse, because I've had > no joy sending mails direct - and presumably nor has anyone else who > normally subscribes to the digest. Two and a half months of downtime > without even a word of explanation is a bit much. > Hi, The listmaster team has been having some difficulties with the list digest software. In some circumstances it will stop working without much warning, which is what happened in this case. Please rest assured that fixing this problem is one of our top priorities. I have restarted the digest, and sent the last few onto the debian-user-digest list. All the other missing digests have not been sent onto the list as their combined size is too large. If you still wish to get them, you can find all the missing messages in mbox format at: http://murphy.debian.org/~pasc/d-u-digest.missing.mbox (23.2 Mb) You can get the same file gzipped at: http://murphy.debian.org/~pasc/d-u-digest.missing.mbox.gz (6.7 Mb) Please accept the apologies of the listmaster team. Regards, Debian listmaster -- Debian GNU/Linux - The Universal Operating System [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: CTRL+ALT+Backspace will kill the X-server
On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 08:13:08AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote: > But then it just springs back to life again, with a login prompt (at > least with xdm here). > > Let's pretend my monitor is being borrowed for a few days and being > replaced by a VT100, and I want to properly end all X processes and > revert to plain tty mode, without rebooting or editing any files. > You can stop xdm with "/etc/init.d/xdm stop" Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: www.debian.org
On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 01:22:27PM +0100, Lukas Ruf wrote: > > Cristi Banciu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-11-21 13:17]: > > > > http://cert.uni-stuttgart.de/files/fw/debian-security-20031121.txt > > > > after having read: I have run upgrades on various machines this > morning. > > Is there any chance that these machines have been compromised too? > If it's on the 'net, there's always a chance ;-) But as that email says, the archive has not been affected. Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: how do I subscribe to debian-announce?
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 09:50:32AM -0500, Rohit Kumar Mehta wrote: > > I had previously used the web interface at lists.debian.org to get on > this debian mailing > list, but now that redirects me here: http://www.debian.org/distrib/ftplist The list archives (lists.debian.org) are hosted on master.debian.org which hasn't been fully re-established yet, hence that page doesn't work fully yet. > Should I just wait until it can be restored or is there another way to > subscribe? Send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with a subject of "subscribe". Make sure you spell subscribe properly or it won't work. In general, you can subscribe to any debian list by email [EMAIL PROTECTED], where you should replace with the actual name of the list. Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: how do I subscribe to debian-announce?
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 04:54:03PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote: > As with any other mailing list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] works. For > debian-announce, this would be [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Please use -request, not -subscribe =-) Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: how do I subscribe to debian-announce?
On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 06:33:44PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 12:51:06PM +1100, Pascal Hakim wrote: > > Please use -request, not -subscribe =-) > > Is Debian running something stupid like ezmlm? > Smartlist Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: unchecked 31 times
On Sun, Nov 30, 2003 at 11:21:11AM +0530, Joydeep Bakshi wrote: > Hi list, > hre is a typical prob in debian. after particular days my debian show during > booting * /dev/hda6 mounted 31 times without checking, check forcde* and it > starts fsck. > > now my question is that has debian programmed to check hard disk after 31 > times mounting the disk ? if so how to change this so that it will check hard > disk whenever find a problem like red-hat ? > > thanks in advanced. > > PS: please cc to me > Hi, You can change this behaviour by using tune2fs. Have a look at the -c and -i option, and make sure you _really_ want to do this. Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: References headers missing in debian-user-digest
On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 11:54:10PM +, Pigeon wrote: > Hi, > > Just catching up with several weeks' worth of list traffic (or trying to :-) ) > and it seems that all the debian-user-digests dated after November 21 are > missing the References: headers from the messages contained in them. The > result is that when I burst the digests and view the result in mutt, > threading is broken. > > Any idea why / estimated date of fix please? > This was broken after the debian machine compromise when murphy was restored. Date of fix is very soon, as soon as I get access to the file that needs fixing. It hasn't been fixed before because I haven't had internet access since the debian accounts got restored (for completly un-related reasons), and the other listmasters were too busy. Cheers, Pasc (with his Listmaster hat on) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: References headers missing in debian-user-digest
On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 11:54:10PM +, Pigeon wrote: > Hi, > > Just catching up with several weeks' worth of list traffic (or trying to :-) ) > and it seems that all the debian-user-digests dated after November 21 are > missing the References: headers from the messages contained in them. The > result is that when I burst the digests and view the result in mutt, > threading is broken. > > Any idea why / estimated date of fix please? It's fixed now! Enjoy! Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: reject non-english mail as spam?
On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 10:10:08PM +0200, Micha Feigin wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 01:03:30AM -0700, Lucas Albers wrote: > > I keep getting spam on the list that is completelly foreign. > > > > SA scores it as this in regards the foreign langauge component: > > 1.5 BODY_8BITS BODY: Body includes 8 consecutive 8-bit characters > > 2.8 UNWANTED_LANGUAGE_BODY BODY: Message written in an undesired language > > 3.2 CHARSET_FARAWAY BODY: Character set indicates a foreign language > > 3.2 CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER A foreign language charset used in headers > > 2.5 MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY MIME character set indicates foreign language > > > > > > Can we tune the sa rules for this list to reject completelly non-english > > email? This is non-trivial. The current plan is to just have some procmail rules to deal with this, which can be set on a per-list basis, instead of having different Spam Assassin configurations for different lists. As you can imagine, those rules would create mayhem on lists such as debian-chinese-big5. > > Or can it be assumed that people will be posting non-english email to this > > list. Not really. This list is supposed to be in english. > This is not my expertise, but how will english emails sent from > computers of people using utf8 (possibly setup to handle another > language) produce with this test? If they should be fine. I picked a list at random the other day and did some quick analysis of what was getting blocked on murphy, and what was going through. I posted the results (so far) on: http://www.redellipse.net/stuff/2004/01/12#2004011201 Of the 98 messages which did make it onto debian-devel, 68 would have could have been blocked if we had a test on the GB2312 charset. I'm assuming there will be similar results on other lists at the moment. Cheers, Pasc :wq -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: reject non-english mail as spam?
On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 11:54:01PM -0700, Lucas Albers wrote: > sounds like a great idea, reduce the spam volume by 2/3rds. > When do you plan to implement this? Well... funny you should ask ;-). I used debian-devel as the test list, managed to stuff it up, and there's now a 7 hour delay or so, for non-subscribers who are posting to any list. We'll be putting it in place over all lists over the next few days. Cheers, Pasc (with a brown paper bag over his head) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to count actual users?
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 12:31:46AM +0100, Hugh Saunders wrote: > On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:03:00AM +0200, Paul Wright wrote: > > I decided that it may be easier to get a reasonable count of how many known > > users of Debian can be counted by the number of unique email addresses have > > suscribed to the lists hosted here. > from http://lists.debian.org/stats/ > > you can say number of users >= 31880 unless people subscribe to > debian-announce twice. > > not sure how you would calculate the actual number of unique subscribed > addresses unless you were a listmaster. > There's 69454 unique subscribed addresses. The problem is that you have a fair amount of people who uses different addresses for different lists. There are also a few mailing lists subscribed to some of the mailing lists, so that number might give you an idea of the order of magnitude, but not much more. There are also people reading the Debian mailing lists through mail to news gateways such as gmane[1]. You will still have to find a way to count people like the ones on the "Who's using Debian" page [2], where you can have 3-4 addresses on the mailing lists, and over 500 computers running Debian. Cheers, Pasc [1]: http://www.gmane.org [2]: http://www.debian.org/users -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: You must have Ncurses installed in order to use 'make menuconfig'
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 03:49:12PM -0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Greetings! > I am trying to recompile my kernel on a freshly installed machine, and got into > a problem: when I try to go for 'make manuconfig', here's what happens: > > However, I *do* have libncurses5 installed, as well as every other packages > which matched a search for ncurses on my dselect. My sources for apt are set as > the 7 binary CDs, and the ftp.us.debian.org site. Try installing libncurses5-dev. Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why aren't my mails reaching the mailing list!?!?
Hi, Your messages are reaching the mailing list. We've just been having a few problems on lists.debian.org. Things are getting normal again on that machine, and most missing messages have been put through the queue again. We have been having problems with spamassassin, and the load on murphy (the machine that runs lists.debian.org) went over the 190 mark on a few different occasions. This is what caused some of the greater than 24 hours delays that we have been seeing. We will probably make an annoucement with more details once everything has settled back down again. Regards, Pasc Debian Listmaster -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: I have a problem with this list
On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 12:29:05PM +0100, Shri Shrikumar wrote: > On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 14:06, Colin Watson wrote: > > murphy, a.k.a. lists.debian.org, has been having some major problems > > over the last day or two. Just wait a while for things to clear. > > I am curious, what sort of problems ? I remember murphy having some > problems a while ago as well although that might have been just that it > was unable to cope with the volume. > > For someone who runs debian or a few machine and always thought of these > things as generally unbreakable esp if configured and managed by > professionals, it would be nice to know the kind of problems one could > face in a high availability server with high load. > We had two main problems: -samosa.debian.org was (and still is) down. Samosa runs db.debian.org which is used by lists.debian.org to authenticate various -announce mailing lists. The script was not timing out, and started using up resources. -After tweaking settings for the Bayesan filtering option of SpamAssassin, it started consuming large amounts of resources. The main effect this had was that after a while lists.debian.org was processing emails much slower than they were coming in. This created the huge delay that caused emails to take so long to be processed. Once the problems were fixed, we still had to slowly let old messages through to avoid the load shooting straight back up. Regards, Pasc pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Correction to installation errors of "fortune"
On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 05:45:16PM +0200, Alexander Schmehl wrote: > * Bob Tilley (AT&T) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040525 14:17]: > > > It was now located "whereis fortune" at "/usr/games/fortune". > > "/usr/games" was added to my PATH system-variable by "PATH= > > $PATH:/usr/games" and normal functioning of fortune resumed. > > > > I've have been unable to learn the current maintainer > > of the fortune package to inform them of this problem. > > You can get the maintainer of the package by running "apt-cache show > $package", if you don't know, to which (installed) package a file > belongs run "dpkg -S /path/file". I'm the maintainer of fortune. The package with the binary is known as fortune-mod. > However: As far as I know, fortune has been in /usr/games as long as the > package exists, and /usr/games was in PATH-Variable for normal users as > long as I remember. Are you sure it isn't a knoppix related problem? Fortune has indeed been in /usr/games/ for ages for as long as I can remember too. It sounds like it's a problem with the path not being the same when you're logged in as root. Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: USE THREADS, DAMMIT! Re: No list mail
On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 09:44:44AM -0700, Stefan O'Rear wrote: > In case it helps... the mail has magically resumed coming to me. I believe we've fixed it now, as long as you don't have a gmail address. Cheers, Pasc (with his listmaster hat on) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delayed mails on debian-user [Now mostly fixed]
Hi, A number of people have commented about not getting mail from the debian-user list. There should not be nearly as many delays in getting mail for most users now. Delays were caused on this list by the high number of gmail subscribers, which caused some gmail servers to start teergrubing lists.debian.org. Unforunately, gmail users will probably continue to suffer for a while until all problems are resolved. Cheers, Pasc (still with his listmaster hat on) -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Delayed mails on debian-user [Now mostly fixed]
'lo, I got some emails asking me what teergrubing was after this post which I managed to delete before replying to. Hopefully the people who were wondering about it will catch this message. On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 03:40:34AM +1000, Pascal Hakim wrote: > Hi, > > Delays were caused on this list by the high number of gmail > subscribers, which caused some gmail servers to start teergrubing > lists.debian.org. > Firstly, that sentence above is incorrect. It should have be: "Delays on this list were caused by the high number of gmail subscribers on this list, combined with the fairly high volume of mails that comes out of it". Basically, what's currently happening is that mails getting sent to gmail.com are taking a _long_ time to get processed. While we get an answer almost straight away on HELO, RCPT TO:, or Mail From, we have to wait until we get a reply at the end of the DATA section of the email. I've done some tests, and it seems to be taking at least 5 minutes to give us an OK code after the message has been sent. While this is not a problem if you are only sending a couple of emails, when you get to the levels that lists.debian.org has to deal with, it starts being a problem. We've setup our MTA so that it can be trying to deliver up 270 messages at any point in time. By holding a connection open for a long period of time, processes that would normaly be delivering mail just sit there waiting for a successfull delivery message. Since there weren't enough processes to deliver messages, the queues were getting longer and longer causing some people to have extreme delays in getting emails from lists. The listmaster team stuck a band-aid on the problem by having some processes set aside to be used uniquely by gmail. That way the problem now only affects people with an address at gmail and no others. If we look at some quick numbers, we realise quite quickly that we're still having quite a problem. In the last 90 minutes, 350 messages were accepted by gmail. Since there are 50 processes dedicated to delivering mail there, it's taking on average 12 minutes for a message to an individual gmail subscriber to go through. We still don't know what's causing the delays when we send mail to gmail. There's two main possibilities I can think of. (a) is that gmail is doing some content filtering after mail reception but before accepting a message. This way it can bounce messages it believes to be spam. (b) is that google is holding connections open to what it thinks are propbably spammers. This is what teergrubing refers to. The idea behind it is that most spammers do not use real SMTP clients, but rather, something that mostly works. By holding a connection open for a long time, a spammer is prevented from sending more spam out, as it has one less process and one less port it can send spam from. As we can see from what's happening to us, this is a very effective technique in stopping someone from delivering mail. There's a fairly interesting article about teergrubing at: http://www.iks-jena.de/mitarb/lutz/usenet/teergrube.en.html At the moment, I'm guessing that (b) happened. I'm still trying to get more information, so it's hard for me to make more than a guess at this point however. Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Delayed mails on debian-user [Now mostly fixed]
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 07:52:54PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote: > BTW, I didn't see a single delayed message during the whole affair. I > wonder if this is because I subscribed to this list so many years ago. > If the list manager sends out messages in the order in which people > subscribed, every single gmail customer would be listed after me. The list server sends out emails in the order in which addresses are in the distribution file. This is normally the subscription order, but listmasters have had to re-schufle addresses on there from time to time. You're fairly close to the start of the list: 690 out of 2252. While the first gmail user is at 1512. Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: can't post to "linux.debian.user" "solved"
On Sat, Aug 21, 2004 at 03:27:41PM +1000, Tim Connors wrote: > Brian Pack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said on Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:53:16 -0400: > > On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 08:01, Roel Schroeven wrote: > > > Marco d'Itri wrote: > > > > On Aug 20, Tim Connors <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > du.au> wrote: > > > >>Unfortunately, linux.* is not a bidrectional gateway, so the posts > > > > Fortunatly, linux.* *IS* a bidirectional gateway, unless your news > > > > server is misconfigured. > > > > > Are you sure? This is the first time I've seen anyone saying it is=20 > > > bidirectional. I've seen many people say that it is unidirectional, and=20 > > > experimential evidence tends to confirm that. > > > > After all the shenanigans of the past week, I've convinced the usenet > > mirror (is that an accurate term here?) on Verizon is unidirectional. > > Nothing I've posted there has made the list proper, nor the web > > archives. > > I'm thinking there are two linux.* (linux.kernel, linux.debian.user > and linux.debian.laptop, etc) heirarchies. With my newserver, there is > the free unidirectional bofh.it gateway that is propogated everywhere > (which writes message-ids and references in the form > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"), but there is also the gmane gateway > some people use (and you seem to have to point your newsever at their > gateway, instead of your own newserver, meaning you can't use it > behind a university firewall, and you can't use it with software that > only can use one newserver) which *is* bidirectional. Maybe gmane put > the mailing lists in linux.* as well, which mislead Marco into > believing I was talking about gmane? For what it's worth, Marco is the administrator of linux.*, and he runs bofh.it so I'd say that at the bare minimum, the gateway is supposed to be bidirectional. Whether it is for you or not probably depends on how servers are configured along the way. Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Important notify about your e-mail account.
On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 06:16:28PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello user of Debian.org e-mail server, > > Your e-mail account will be disabled because of improper using in next > three days, if you are still wishing to use it, please, resign your > account information. > > For more information see the attached file. > > Best wishes, >The Debian.org team http://www.debian.org Hi folks, As some people have emailed the Listmaster Team about this, I'd like to make it clear that we're not about to disable anything. This looks to me like some sort of anti-virus software gone mad, or maybe a new virus or spam. Regards, -- Pasc (with his listmaster hat on) Please CC me on replies. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debain on the rise ! - However ....
On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 11:40:08AM -0500, Adam Aube wrote: > I think a separate General Discussion list would be a good idea - it would > keep debian-user focused on user support. Perhaps call it debian-talk or > debian-chat? > debian-curiosa? My experience with this type of thing is that everyone wants other people to listen to them, but very few people want to listen to others for an extended period of time. Cheers, Pasc Listmaster -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: I can't unsubscribe from the list
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 07:14:48PM -0400, Daniel Guido wrote: > someone take me off these lists: debian-user and debian-devel. i tried > 3 different methods of unsubscribing so far (web form, REQUEST address, > and emailing the listmaster) and none worked. sorry to be a bother, but > this is flooding my mailbox. 'lo, I've removed you from the lists you were subscribed on. You were emailing the wrong -REQUEST addresses which is why it wasn't working. Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT: Viruses on lists
On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 09:22:41PM +0100, Jonathan Matthews wrote: > Paul Johnson had the gall to say: > > "Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [snip] > > > Almost. murphy generates a bounce and sends it to the list manager > > > (mailman, majordomo, ezmlm, etc. - I don't know what one murphy is > > > running). The list manager then counts that against you in its > > > determination of which addresses are invalid and need to be removed > > > from the list. > > > > It takes quite a few bounces before you get removed, though. > > Does anyone know a definitive figure or rate here? 80% of messages sent by the list bouncing in a rolling 24 hour window, calculated at 45 past the hour, every hour. > > > My choice is to simply drop viruses. I don't expect to have any legit > > > messages falsely identified as viral, and dropping the message simply > > > removes waste from the network bandwidth and disk storage of the > > > world. I see no need to push the bounce back at someone else, > > > particularly since the offender is rarely the one punished in that > > > case. > > Drop /after/ accepting? Would that not mark you (in the virus' eyes, > anyway) as a potential target? What with viruses having their own > builtin SMTP engines these days and hence knowing for sure what response > was given to the SMTP session, is that not potentially inviting future, > smarter viruses (with memories for this sort of thing) to hit you first? I really can't see that being an issue. > > Which is why I reject at SMTP. Doesn't push a bounce back to forged > > addresses. > > I should have said - I've followed Paul's instructions on ursine.ca to > set this up, and am consequently rejecting at SMTP time. > > I'm unsure as to the difference between accepting a mail and bouncing > later and rejecting at SMTP time as far as murphy is concerned. (I'm > fine with the general difference for normal mail.) Can anyone venture > an opinion? Do both bounces (is it correct to call a 5xx reject a > "bounce"?) count similarly negatively when working out who shouldn't be > on the list anymore? Should I stop asking questions (sort of like this > one?) inside other questions? They'll both count the same. The only ones that don't count are `soft' bounces, ie stuff that matches: * 1^0 ^Subject: WARNING: message delayed * 1^0 ^Subject: Delivery Notification: Delivery has been delayed * 1^0 ^Subject: Message status - opened * 1^0 ^Subject: (Returned mail: )?warning: c(an|ould )not send m(essage fo|ail afte)r * 1^0 ^Subject: Undeliverable (RFC822 )?mail: temporarily unable to deliver * 1^0 ^Subject: \*\*\* WARNING - Undelivered mail in mailqueue # Soft bounce from Courier Mail Server * 1^0 ^Subject: WARNING: delayed mail. # Soft bounce from Postfix * 1^0 ^Subject: Delayed Mail # Soft bounce from MDaemon? * 1^0 ^Subject: Transient Delivery Failure Matching the actual codes is non-trivial as every MTA uses a different syntax of giving us result, this is an alright approximation in terms of matching temporary bounces... Finally, yes you should stop asking questions inside other questions, as you will find otherwise, that people will only answer the questions you don't want answered, while ignoring the important ones you did want answered. > Answers on a postcard, please ... heh ;-) Cheers, Pasc Please CC me on replies, I'm not subscribed to this list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT: Viruses on lists
On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 02:06:43PM -0400, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote: > Almost. murphy generates a bounce and sends it to the list manager > (mailman, majordomo, ezmlm, etc. - I don't know what one murphy is > running). The list manager then counts that against you in its > determination of which addresses are invalid and need to be removed > from the list. Smartlist + some procmail and perl on top. Cheers, Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why are my posts so delayed??
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 02:38:01PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Or is everyone seeing the same time delay? > > No. Mail gets sent out in the same order as the distribution file which is the same order as the one people subscribed in. This doesn't normally make a difference of more than a few seconds except in cases like this. Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why are my posts so delayed??
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 02:39:43PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Thursday 25 May 2006 13:02, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > > > murphy (the machine that handes lists.debian.org) has been listed by > > SpamCop. It is under heavy load since the queue is growing longer and > > longer. > > Ah-ha! If your mail isn't getting through because it's getting dropped by > mail servers due to listings on spamcop, remind your mail administrator that > spamcop strongly advises against using their BL as a sole qualifier for > rejection. Large numbers of people greylisting murphy.d.o during the 24h it was listed in the spamcop listing is contributing quite heavily to the huge queues we're seeing. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why are my posts so delayed??
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 11:36:33AM +0100, Digby Tarvin wrote: > Just curious, > > Can anyone tell me why there seems to be a delay of about 12 hours > between posting a message and seeing it appear on the list? > > It makes it really hard to contribute to a thread if the discussion > is long over by the time my response to the original message appears... > > Or is everyone seeing the same time delay? > by my calculations this delay corresponds to roughly what I would > expect if the list server was on Uranus.. > > For example here is a message posted at 18:00 yesterday evening, and > I received it back through the list at about 6:00am the following > morning. > > Looking at the headers, I seem to have received the original message > at 10:00GMT when it was sent at 21:00GMT the previous night. The first > reply was dated 01:00GMT, and I received it at 16:00GMT. That looks > like the first respondent was seeing a four hour delay. The machine that handles lists (murphy.debian.org) was recently moved to a new colo, and got a new IP as a result. There were a large number of people who whitelisted or at least didn't behave as aggressively towards us, as they would towards normal mail servers. Since we've lost a number of those whitelisting due to a new IP, we're having difficulty delivering all the mail in a timely fashion. The mail queue seem to be going mostly down, but does occasionally go back up. We're trying to talk to some of the postmasters of the hosts that are affecting us the most. To make matters worse, we were blacklisted by spamcop for around 24h a couple of days ago, which made things worse. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT: Politics [Was:Social Contract]
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 03:31:49PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > > The Queen may be "Head of state" but the person with power here is the > > Prime Minister... The Queen is just a figurehead... > > Australian constitutional crisis of 1975. Unelected Governor- > General Sir John Kerr forced the elected PM out of office. Australian governor-generals are chosen by the prime minister... (including John Kerr), and can be dismissed by the prime minister. Yes, we technically have a race condition at the top of our government. (But finally! An off-topic debian-user politics thread on *Australia*) Pasc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange List Behavior
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 06:02:43AM -0700, Leonard Chatagnier wrote: > I have posted to both Deb-users & -kde lists and > received three replys to these postings. Yet, I still > do not see the postings when I visit the list sites > and its been about 24 hrs since posting. Anyone know > how this can be? > Neither lists has changed since the first visit a day > ago. I thought I might be blacklisted again due to > having SBCYahoo DSL as my ISP until I got the replys. > Very strange. > The list archives are temperamental at times and require a swift kick, and a knowing tap to work correctly. I've kicked them and tapped them in the appropriate places, and they're updating again. Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT: does reporting to spamcop do any good?
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 02:01:55PM +, s. keeling wrote: > Kamaraju Kusumanchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Has anyone on the list used spamcop ( http://www.spamcop.net/ ) to report > > spam? It takes sometime to report the spam. > > My procmail scripts report it, based on what spamassassin and > bogofilter have to say about it. My MUA is mutt and I've defined > macros which train bf and run w3m on spamcop's reply email. It only > takes a few seconds to confirm each spam. For people following at home, automating the reporting of spam is discouraged. A fair number of people manage to report either their own ISPs or mails they've actually signed up to receive (for example, this list server has been blacklisted a few times), so you'll need to be careful as to what you report, unless you know what you're doing. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mutt configuration not displaying my name in mailing list threads
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 06:36:59PM -0400, mlaks wrote: > > Hi, > > I have switched over to mutt as my MUA. It took some work to get exim4 and > fetchmail etc working. > > now i notice that my own posts to debian-user are not listed by "mitchell > laks" or mlaks in the > mutt index view. instead it says > > 22104 F Jun 18 To debian-user (1.5K) sid kde printing and cups setup > 22105 sT Jun 18 Roger Leigh (5.0K) > > 22106 O F Jun 18 To debian-user (1.0K) > > 22107 Jun 17 Joseph Smidt(1.9K) Can I update unstable from USB memory > st > 22108 Jun 18 Arafangion (0.9K) > > 22109 Jun 17 Serena Cantor (0.8K) can't boot sarge after installation > 22110 O Jun 18 John Kelly (0.5K) |->Re: OT: does reporting to spamcop > do > > notice it says > "To debian-user" > instead of > > mitchell laks > or > mlaks > > > > > what do i change in my muttrc to get this right? > You need to change your mutt configuration slightly. Mutt decides what fields to display with the index_format[1] variable. You'll want to change the author display from %v (first name of the author, or the recipient if the message is from you) to %t (`to:' field (recipients)) Mutt will decide whether the email is from you or not based on the value of alternates[2] variable. Cheers, Pasc [1]: http://www.mutt.org/doc/manual/manual-6.html#index_format [2]: http://www.mutt.org/doc/manual/manual-6.html#alternates -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT: does reporting to spamcop do any good?
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 11:59:56PM +, s. keeling wrote: > Pascal Hakim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > A fair number of people manage to report either their own > > ISPs or mails they've actually signed up to receive (for example, > > this list server has been blacklisted a few times), so you'll need to > > be careful as to what you report, unless you know what you're doing. > > Also agreed. However, Spamcop does appear to be smart enough to > recognize list mail. It goes after the the miscreants, not their > victims. > Spamcop is only smart enough to detect that after someone convinces them that a server they've blacklisted is in fact relaying correctly. How long the machine in question remains blacklisted is up to them. If their parser can't find another machine to blame, they will go back to picking one of the victims. This will be acceptable to some and not to others, this probably depends on how much you want mail to flow through, how much collateral damage you're willing to accept, and whether you used blacklists to block traffic or score negatively. Interestingly, spamcop's system also appears to be entirely IP based when it comes to identifying hosts; I can't decide whether that's a good idea or not. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: apt-get update doesn't work?
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 06:22:11PM -0700, Christopher Nelson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 04:33:04PM -0700, RevSlowmo wrote: > > Miles Bader wrote: > > > When I do "sudo apt-get update", I get the following errors: > > > > > >$ LANG=C sudo apt-get update > > >Get:1 http://ftp.us.debian.org unstable Release.gpg [189B] > > >Hit http://ftp.us.debian.org unstable Release > > >Get:2 http://ftp.us.debian.org unstable/main Packages [3166kB] > > >Hit http://ftp.us.debian.org unstable/contrib Packages/DiffIndex > > >Get:3 http://ftp.us.debian.org unstable/non-free Packages [65.7kB] > > >Fetched 3B in 5s (1B/s) > > >Failed to fetch > > > http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/dists/unstable/main/binary-i386/Packages.bz2 > > > MD5Sum mismatch > > >Failed to fetch > > > http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/dists/unstable/non-free/binary-i386/Packages.bz2 > > > MD5Sum mismatch > > >Reading package lists... Done > > >W: Couldn't stat source package list http://ftp.us.debian.org > > > unstable/main Packages > > > (/var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_unstable_main_binary-i386_Packages) > > > - stat (2 No such file or directory) > > >W: Couldn't stat source package list http://ftp.us.debian.org > > > unstable/non-free Packages > > > (/var/lib/apt/lists/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_unstable_non-free_binary-i386_Packages) > > > - stat (2 No such file or directory) > > >W: You may want to run apt-get update to correct these problems > > >E: Some index files failed to download, they have been ignored, or old > > > ones used instead. > > > > > > My /etc/apt/sources.list file is: > > > > > >deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free > > How long did the problem start? I just did an update using the same > mirror with no problems. ftp.us.debian.org points to a few different machines, so it's quite possible for different people to get different results. If there's a mirror behind there that is missing some files, it might be worth telling the mirror team about it. 12:01 ~% host ftp.us.debian.org ftp.us.debian.org has address 35.9.37.225 ftp.us.debian.org has address 128.101.240.212 ftp.us.debian.org has address 204.152.191.7 ftp.us.debian.org has address 216.37.55.114 Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using a development server also as a backup production server
On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 08:34:22PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 02:21:50PM -1000, Kar-Hai Chu wrote: > > > > Due to a tight budget, we do not have a live redundant backup to our > > production server (other than its RAID 1). One thing we *do* have is > > hard drive space - so we've been trying to setup a process where live > > production data (mysql, apache) is backup up nightly onto the > > development machine, so if the production server goes down, we can > > "flip" the development server into production mode (move development > > data aside, and symlink to all the backed up production data). > > > I think you want the fake package for the IP switch: > > Fake is a utility that enables the IP address be taken over by bringing up > a second interface on the host machine and using gratuitous arp. Designed > to switch in backup servers on a LAN. > > As far as the other stuff, you should probably write a script that does > everything as it seems there is lots to do. Doing it manually will very > likely be error-prone. Also, you definitely make sure that any > databases are being dumped properly on the production machine and then > restored on the testing machine. That is, simply using something like > rsync or scp to transfer the on-disk files that contain the database > cluster is *not* a valid backup stratedy. > > That said, if you have lots of space on the backup server, you might > want to look into systemimager to create a snapshot of the entire > production server's filesystem. Just remember about the proper way to > get the databases backed up. > > Here is a script I use to backup my postgresql cluster: > I realise the original poster uses MySQL, but if you want to keep a postgresql DB in sync like that, a great way to do it is by using PITR/WAL shipping[1]. This will work pretty well if what you're worried about is hardware failure, and will let you set just how far behind you want the slave to be. As far as 'flipping' setups go, have a look at the "heartbeat" or "heartbeat-2" packages if you want to do something more complex (and automated). If you've gone that far, ldirectord might also be interesting to you. Cheers, Pasc [1]: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/warm-standby.html -- Pascal Hakim+61 403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: HP/Compaq DL380 G2 advice/help sought
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:06:16PM +0100, Kelly Harding wrote: > Hi, > > I've just aquired a HP/compaq DL380 G2 server, with 2Gb RAM and 2x36Gb hard > drives. > > I was wondering if anyone on the list has any experience with installing > Debian > on this hardware and know > of any pitfalls, etc I should be aware of? > While you've obviously figured this out since, a great place to find out info about Debian on various proliant machines is: http://wiki.debian.org/HP/ProLiant Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using a development server also as a backup production server
On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 05:04:29AM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 06:56:45PM +1000, Pascal Hakim wrote: > > > > I realise the original poster uses MySQL, but if you want to keep a > > postgresql DB in sync like that, a great way to do it is by using > > PITR/WAL shipping[1]. This will work pretty well if what you're worried > > about is hardware failure, and will let you set just how far behind you > > want the slave to be. > > > Interesting. Is that a new feature in 8.2? > It was added in 8.0: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.0/static/backup-online.html As an added bonus, since you can replay stuff in advance, you can restore in seconds rather than hours. Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: I recieve spam "Debian security."
Hi, On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 03:28:14PM +0700, Surachai Locharoen wrote: > Where this spam come form? > > That's what we call the petsupermaket spammer. It seems to be replying to most people who post on debian-devel, debian-user and sometimes some of our other lists. We haven't been able to match a subscriber to this, and it's not happening all the time. If anyone can find something that makes is consistently go off, please let us at [EMAIL PROTECTED], it'd be quite helpful, as we haven't figured it out yet. It went away for a while two months ago or so and recently came back. We have been trying to reach someone at the ISP, but it doesn't appear we've had much luck so far. We're trying to avoid having to take some more drastic measures. Cheers, Pasc (with his listmaster hat on) -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lists.debian.org vs google groups
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 10:21:47AM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > John Hasler wrote: > >raju writes: > > > >>Is there anything that can be done with lists.debian.org that cannot be > >>done through google groups? > >> > > > >Is there anything that can be done with google groups that cannot be > >done through lists.debian.org? > > > Can be done - no. > Will be done - yes. > > 1) In google groups, we can set 'only members can post' option. This can > be done with lists.debian.org as well. But listsmasters' decision is to > not do it. This hasn't been done as we want people to be able to contribute as easily as possible. Emails that come from non-subscribers are placed through an extra spam check (the one we call crossassassin), which is actually quite effective. It's stopped 590 spam emails from being posted in the 65 hours. > 2) The email addresses from d-u archives are available in clear text. > This is another source of spam (as the spammers frequently scan through > the arhives and look for email IDs). In google groups, the email > addresses are not displayed in the archives. But at the same time, it > wont deprive you of anything. One can still contact the original author > if there is a need. Again this could possibly be done in > lists.debian.org as well. But my understanding is that the listmasters' > chose not to do it. There have been a number of discussions about that. The main issue with that so far, is that the @ sign is used by a number of different programs to indicate things that aren't email address. We don't want to mangle arch/baz archive names, we don't want to mangle perl or PHP code that's posted to the list and so on. Realistically, it might be possible to do something to make the archives have a few less visible addresses, but I'm not sure this would make such a huge difference. I will try and do some tests this weekend to see if I can identify where things are coming from. > The second point is very important IMHO. Just create a new email > address. Subscribe to d-u. Wait for 4-5 days. Look at the amazing amount > of spam you get. Now create another email address. Subscribe to some > high volume, 'only members can post' google groups. Wait for 4-5 days. > Look at the spam you receive. You will see what I mean. You shouldn't get any spam sent to your new address unless you actually post something. If you do, you will get some. This doesn't have to come from a spam bot going through our list archives though. There are for example, a number of news gateways that take up our lists. Obscuring our archives would not affect those. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lists.debian.org vs google groups
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 05:18:19PM -0600, Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > On 2006-04-03, Pascal Hakim penned: > > > > There have been a number of discussions about that. The main issue > > with that so far, is that the @ sign is used by a number of > > different programs to indicate things that aren't email address. We > > don't want to mangle arch/baz archive names, we don't want to mangle > > perl or PHP code that's posted to the list and so on. > > I'm having trouble envisioning this as a huge problem. At some point, > whatever converts the mailing list to HTML had access to the headers, > so it seems like it would be pretty easy to only affect, say, the From > header. Some people leak headers into the body of their email. For example, the first email in this month's archive: http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2006/04/msg0.html I don't even want to know how the discussion got onto the topic of fresh fruit. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lists.debian.org vs google groups
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 06:58:52PM -0500, Sumo Wrestler (or just ate too much) wrote: > Pascal Hakim wrote: > > > >Some people leak headers into the body of their email. > > > >For example, the first email in this month's archive: > > > >http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2006/04/msg0.html > > > > Don't worry about the body. It's the posters' responsibilities to > protect other people e-mail addys when they post. The headers should be > the primary concern. Bodies rarely have e-mail addys in them, and > headers always have e-mail addys in them, so the focus should be on the > headers. I'm sorry, but I don't believe you can say something is another user's responsability. The last thing the listmaster team wants to have to do is to go through every message that has leaked the headers and deal with that. Someone's already mentioned that it looks like gmail does that by default. We have a lot of gmail subscribers, and that number is only going to grow. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lists.debian.org vs google groups
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 11:03:40AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: > At 1144114138 past the epoch, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > > some lists like debian-www receive much more spam from > > non-subscribers than the amount of "non-subscriber spam" > > received by d-u. > > I've noticed debian-www being very busy, but I think that's > because webmaster@ forwards to it. > debian-www@lists.debian.org is in the footer of most webpages on http://www.debian.org Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lists.debian.org vs google groups
On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 01:28:58AM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > Is the crossassassin something specific to d-u or is it used for all the > lists on lists.debian.org? I ask because, some lists like debian-www > receive much more spam from non-subscribers than the amount of > "non-subscriber spam" received by d-u. Crossassassin works by calculating message hashsums and dumping things that look like they've been cross-posted too much. All of our lists run it, but it's less effective on lists that have a different audience than the rest. For example, the debian-www list, as there will be fewer messages cross-posted from that list to others. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lists.debian.org vs google groups
Hi, On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 09:51:30AM +0100, Doofus wrote: > > Can you quote: I can't do the last twelve months, as we don't keep our data that far back, and some of these numbers have to be counted invidually, but here are the numbers for March. Due to our multi step filtering process I can't even get numbers for the whole of March, but we can make some assumptions. > 1. the total number of posts from all sources received by the d-u list > servers in the last twelve months, The first step is dropping things at the MTA stage. Those logs don't go back that far as they get pretty big. I've picked a full 7 days at random that to be used as a sample and we get: 5891. Since we're playing with round figures anyway, let's say that works out at: 4.3 * 5891 = ~25300 All the rest of the numbers are for March: CrossAssassin: 7375 SpamAssassin: 4672 Other filters: 333 -> subtotal: 12380 Total blocked spam: ~37700 Actual messages pushed through the list: 3404 > > 2. the number of posts received by non list members in the same period, This can mean two things. If you want the numbers above but for non-subscribers only, we can't do that for a large chunk of them, and it would take too long for the rest. If you want to know simply how many posts were made by non-subscribers that then made it to the list and were posted, it's 862. > > 3. the number posts actually published on d-u after all filtering in the > same period 3404 > > and > > 4. the number spam (or non-spam) posts actually published on d-u in the > same period? I went through the archive for March, and pulled out the numbers. I found 25 spam messages[1], which leaves us with 3379 valid messages. > The answers to these should go some way to highlight the scale of the > problem, and also how much benefit is gained by allowing everyone in the > world aim their crap at all of our mailboxes. I'll be surprised if a > statistic is available for (4), but would appreciate the answers if > they're available. Even if we assume that I fell asleep on the page down key while counting 4., and guess that I missed half, we're still talking about blocking over 800 valid messages. 25/37700 works out to be 0.066% of spam not being blocked. It's still annoying of course, as the metric to use is the number of spam messages that make it through rather than the percentage that make it through. SNR and all that. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lists.debian.org vs google groups
'lo, On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 09:19:27AM -0500, Mike McCarty wrote: > Doofus wrote: > > > >Can you quote: > > H! Someone calling for reasoned, rational discussion! > H! Someone start a flamewar, instanter!!! > > >1. the total number of posts from all sources received by the d-u list > >servers in the last twelve months, > > > >2. the number of posts received by non list members in the same period, > > > >3. the number posts actually published on d-u after all filtering in the > >same period > > > >and > > > >4. the number spam (or non-spam) posts actually published on d-u in the > >same period? > > 5. what percentage of (2) is actually spam [or is that what you mean by (3)] You should be able to work it out from my previous post. I hadn't seen yours when I wrote my reply. > 6. the number of times a reasonable, rational, calmly stated suggestion > to list admin was actually responded to in a reasonable, rational way, > instead of being rejected out of hand as "not being the Debian way", > or "we've already discussed that a thousand times here, and we're not > going to change" I'm afraid I can't find any of those. Can you please refresh my memory? I know that some of the list admins have at time lost their tempers, but this is not really a common occurrence. > >The answers to these should go some way to highlight the scale of the > >problem, and also how much benefit is gained by allowing everyone in the > >world aim their crap at all of our mailboxes. I'll be surprised if a > >statistic is available for (4), but would appreciate the answers if > >they're available. > > I predict that > > (1) two already-formed factions will immediately chime in > (2) a near flame war will ensue > (3) no such figures will be forthcoming Sorry. > (4) even if some are, and even if they clearly support your > position, it won't sway those who disagree with you > (5) some will consider you foolish for trying yet again, though > secretly they will admire your courage > (6) others will think you foolish for being so stupid as not to > understand why letting everyone send his crap is a good idea > (7) the group mentioned in (6) will prevail. > > I'm hoping to be proven wrong on all counts. > > Mike Cheers, Pasc (with his listmaster hat on) -- Pascal Hakim+61 403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: default group ownership of a file
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 05:38:49PM +0200, Albert Dengg wrote: > Hi > > On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 10:10:41AM -0500, Michael Schurter wrote: > > ChadDavis wrote: > > >Hello. I need to know how the group ownership of a file is decided in > > >debian. Also, is it the same for all linux systems? > > > > All Linux (and probably Unix) filesystems store a group ID number (gid) on > > a per-file basis. The gid is looked up in /etc/group to get the textual > > group > > name you're used to seeing. > > > > All users have a primary group membership as well as any number of > > secondary group memberships. (use the /usr/bin/id command to get that > > info) When a > > user creates a file, that file's group owner is set to the users primary > > group. > well that is not _completly_ true... > at least in my expirience if the user has write permisions in the diectory > only > because of a certain group membership (for example in /usr/src with the > src group) the gid of the file is set to respective group and not the > users primary group. That should only happen if you have the setgid flag set on the parent directory. Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: lists.debian.org vs google groups
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 11:36:05AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > Quoting Pascal Hakim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >Even if we assume that I fell asleep on the page down key while counting > >4., and guess that I missed half, we're still talking about blocking > >over 800 valid messages. > > > >25/37700 works out to be 0.066% of spam not being blocked. It's still > >annoying of course, as the metric to use is the number of spam messages > >that make it through rather than the percentage that make it through. > >SNR and all that. > > > > That is crazy. How is the spam filter that good? On my own server I > block a ton of stuff at SMTP time, but an annoyingly high amount of > stuff still gets past SpamAssassin. Is the filter processing all this > mail regularly trained? I know that we can now report mail in the > archive as spam, e.g., if it actually gets through. Has that > contributed to an increased level of effectiveness? > The filters have been around for quite a while. There's no systematic training of filters apart from SpamAssassin AWL stuff. We haven't integrated the mail marked as spam from the archives into our filtering yet, so that has obviously had no effect. Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: lists.debian.org vs google groups
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 11:25:32AM +0100, Doofus wrote: > Matthew R. Dempsky wrote: > > >On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 09:28:59AM +0100, Doofus wrote: > > > > > >>I'll never accept this reasoning. To my mind it takes openness to a > >>level that just causes unnecessary grief for many legitimate users. > >> > >> > > > >What unnecessary grief? > > > >Take a look through the debian-user archive for March 2006. Count how > >many spam messages actually hit the list. > > > > > > Yes, I did that with Pacsal's help (see below), and take your point. The > absolute numbers of unblocked spams makes it difficult for anyone to > whine about it too much. No spam at all would be even better though, and > I still haven't read a reasoned case for leaving the list open for > posting to The World, subscribed or not. Well there were over 800 messages that came through from non-subscribers. Making people subscribe is a barrier to entry, and we want to make it as easy as possible for people to contribute. We have a list which is subscriber only ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). There are a number of people who when they receive the message telling them they must be a subscriber to post, simply move on to something else. My experience in other places is similar. People think it's not really worth the effort and move on. > I take your point here too; none of these disussions have much to do > with debian. I just needed some honest and accurate figures really. > Maybe an automated monthly post summarising the number of posts received > / number of spams blocked / number of spams passed through would serve > to squash threads like this before they begin. If I had a way to automatically count the number of spam messages that had made it through the list, I wouldn't be using that tool to do stats but to actually do the filtering. Cheers, Pasc (with his listmaster hat on) -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: anacron can't run hourly?
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 12:38:57PM +0800, phyrster wrote: > Hi Debianers, Hi, > > Can anacron run hourly jobs? Nope. The smallest timespan that anacron can schedule jobs for is a day. > My /etc/anacrontab reads like this: > > = > 1 5 cron.daily nice run-parts --report /etc/cron.daily > 7 10 cron.weekly nice run-parts --report /etc/cron.weekly > @monthly15 cron.monthly nice run-parts --report > /etc/cron.monthly > > > I want to schedule mail fetching and sending for every few minutes, but from > the information I got so far, it seems anacron can't handle hourly jobs. You should be using cron for this. The real advantage of anacron comes in when you want to make sure things like cron.daily run at least once a day, when your computer is not always on. Adding support for anacron to have hourly granularity would be possible, but I can't really think of a situation where this would be desirable (but feel free to file a wishlist bug against anacron if you can come up with a situation where it would be useful to have such a feature!) Cheers, Pasc -- Pascal Hakim 0403 411 672 Do Not Bend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
