-
(deutsche Version unten)
Dear SuSE Linux User,
thank you for your message regarding "hello".
Please note that the email address you sent your message to
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is no longer in use. Of course you still can sen
-
(deutsche Version unten)
Dear SuSE Linux User,
thank you for your message regarding "hello".
Please note that the email address you sent your message to
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is no longer in use. Of course you still can sen
* Craig Schneider wrote:
[...]
> dpkg: error processing courier-authdaemon (--remove):
> Package is in a very bad inconsistent state - you should
> reinstall it before attempting a removal.
>
> Any ideas guys ?
"you should reinstall it before attempting a removal"
Norbert
* Craig Schneider wrote:
[...]
> dpkg: error processing courier-authdaemon (--remove):
> Package is in a very bad inconsistent state - you should
> reinstall it before attempting a removal.
>
> Any ideas guys ?
"you should reinstall it before attempting a removal"
Norbert
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 08:48:05AM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 02:18:34PM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote:
> > Of course, you need to implement quite a bit of SMTP before getting at
> > the DATA phase, but it's potentially cleaner than doing it in a
> > transparent proxy,
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 08:48:05AM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 02:18:34PM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote:
> > Of course, you need to implement quite a bit of SMTP before getting at
> > the DATA phase, but it's potentially cleaner than doing it in a
> > transparent proxy,
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 02:18:34PM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote:
> Of course, you need to implement quite a bit of SMTP before getting at
> the DATA phase, but it's potentially cleaner than doing it in a
> transparent proxy, because you only have to deal with the pure data
> stream through a set o
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 08:57:01AM -0400, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
> Is this true, or will a getsockname() performed on a TCP socket which
> was created as one endpoint of a connection which is being transparently
> proxied give the client's intended destination address? I do not know.
My experience
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 23:15, Alex Borges (lex) wrote:
> This kind of thing is simple at least with qmail, u set up a front
> end box that does the smtp, make it scan through qmailscan...whatever,
> those filters will let u decide the action to take if a virus is found.
The problem is that spam
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 02:18:34PM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote:
> Of course, you need to implement quite a bit of SMTP before getting at
> the DATA phase, but it's potentially cleaner than doing it in a
> transparent proxy, because you only have to deal with the pure data
> stream through a set o
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 08:57:01AM -0400, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
> Is this true, or will a getsockname() performed on a TCP socket which
> was created as one endpoint of a connection which is being transparently
> proxied give the client's intended destination address? I do not know.
My experience
Um
This kind of thing is simple at least with qmail, u set up a front
end box that does the smtp, make it scan through qmailscan...whatever,
those filters will let u decide the action to take if a virus is found.
If none, then forward to smtp on your real server for delivery...
Probably
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 23:15, Alex Borges (lex) wrote:
> This kind of thing is simple at least with qmail, u set up a front
> end box that does the smtp, make it scan through qmailscan...whatever,
> those filters will let u decide the action to take if a virus is found.
The problem is that spam
Um
This kind of thing is simple at least with qmail, u set up a front
end box that does the smtp, make it scan through qmailscan...whatever,
those filters will let u decide the action to take if a virus is found.
If none, then forward to smtp on your real server for delivery...
Probably
On Thu, 2002-10-17 at 04:51, Brian May wrote:
> AFAIK transparent proxying in Linux is limited to redirecting all ports
> to a given port another host. It is not possible for the proxy server to
> tell, for instance what the original destination IP address was.
Is this true, or will a getsockname()
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 11:41:20AM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote a
few disorganized lines, saying:
> Qmail has such a smtp filter (rblsmtpd[2]) that checks MAIL FROM:
> domains against RBLs; it only runs the real server (qmail-smtpd[3]) if
> the domain is not listed.
Of course, it checks the peer
On Thu, 2002-10-17 at 04:51, Brian May wrote:
> AFAIK transparent proxying in Linux is limited to redirecting all ports
> to a given port another host. It is not possible for the proxy server to
> tell, for instance what the original destination IP address was.
Is this true, or will a getsockname()
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 11:41:20AM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote a
few disorganized lines, saying:
> Qmail has such a smtp filter (rblsmtpd[2]) that checks MAIL FROM:
> domains against RBLs; it only runs the real server (qmail-smtpd[3]) if
> the domain is not listed.
Of course, it checks the peer
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 10:44:06AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 10:32, Brian May wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 10:25:52AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> > > Ideally we would be able to detect the virus as it comes in and give a
> > > 5xx SMTP code.
> >
> > Yes, that w
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 10:44:06AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> Is Linux transperant proxying up to this? Can you intercept a data stream
> while preserving both the source and destination addresses?
I don't think it is possible, but I do not know why...
AFAIK transparent proxying in Linux is
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 10:32, Brian May wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 10:25:52AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> > Ideally we would be able to detect the virus as it comes in and give a
> > 5xx SMTP code.
>
> Yes, that would be the best solution.
>
> exim is the only MTA I know of where I have heard
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 10:44:06AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 10:32, Brian May wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 10:25:52AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> > > Ideally we would be able to detect the virus as it comes in and give a
> > > 5xx SMTP code.
> >
> > Yes, that
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 10:44:06AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> Is Linux transperant proxying up to this? Can you intercept a data stream
> while preserving both the source and destination addresses?
I don't think it is possible, but I do not know why...
AFAIK transparent proxying in Linux is
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 10:32, Brian May wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 10:25:52AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> > Ideally we would be able to detect the virus as it comes in and give a
> > 5xx SMTP code.
>
> Yes, that would be the best solution.
>
> exim is the only MTA I know of where I have heard
> > Yes, analog is ugly. However, look into the debian package 'rmagic'.
>
> I have done.
> I can't get it to work :(
> Anyone on this list got it to work with testing, 2.2.19?
Yup sure... and yes it is fiddly :/
I have a little script called 'runstats' which contans the following:
---
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, Gavin Hamill wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 01:32:18PM +0100, Andreas Rabus wrote:
>
> Yes, analog is ugly. However, look into the debian package 'rmagic'.
I have done.
I can't get it to work :(
Anyone on this list got it to work with testing, 2.2.19?
--
Martin Wheeler <
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 01:32:18PM +0100, Andreas Rabus wrote:
>
> Hi,
> i'm looking for a web-log analyzer for potato and multiple virtual hosts.
> webalizer keeps breaking (didn't create stats for some days, and then starts
> again...),
> analog is ugly, ...
Yes, analog is ugly. However, look
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, Andreas Rabus wrote:
>
> Hi,
> i'm looking for a web-log analyzer for potato and multiple virtual hosts.
> webalizer keeps breaking (didn't create stats for some days, and then starts
> again...),
> analog is ugly, ...
> and all need plain text log.
>
You know perl? Prog
ROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, 18 August 2001 11:20 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: your mail
On Sat, Aug 18, 2001 at 10:37:58AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> unsubscribe
Amazing, I came directly from exim-users where someone else did the
exact same thing and in consequence w
On Sat, Aug 18, 2001 at 10:37:58AM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> unsubscribe
Amazing, I came directly from exim-users where someone else did the
exact same thing and in consequence was being ridiculed.
One thing is to be told to RTFM, but when people will ignore error
messages ("It doesn't w
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Craig wrote:
> Ahoy there maties
>
> Was wondering if there is a set of sendmail config files similar to RedHats
> sendmail-cf.rpm in Debian, which I can use with m4 to general my config
> files.
Yes they are part of the sendmail package. They reside in:
/usr/share/
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Craig wrote:
> Ahoy there maties
>
> Was wondering if there is a set of sendmail config files similar to RedHats
> sendmail-cf.rpm in Debian, which I can use with m4 to general my config
> files.
Yes they are part of the sendmail package. They reside in:
/usr/share
On Wed, 27 Dec 2000, Jeremy Lunn wrote:
> About this whole issue of chrooting the user's environment. I think
> there is not too much point.
.. unless of course, the client demands it!
> A chroot is to prevent users gaining root,
Not exactly. It has little to do with root privileges; but a l
On Wed, 27 Dec 2000, Ian wrote:
> I would like to know the answer to your problem as we have the same issue,
> ie users can "see" the entire drive structure when connecting via ssh but
> if they connect via ftp their relevent "home" directory becomes the root.
> Obviously we would prefer to limit
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 04:47:26PM +1000, Ian wrote:
> opps I'll try that again.
> I would like to know the answer to your problem as we have the same issue,
> ie users can "see" the entire drive structure when connecting via ssh but
> if they connect via ftp their relevent "home" directory become
On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Andreas Rabus wrote:
> "Error Creating AF_INET socket (Operation now in progress)"
yah..there really is some bugs...
-
Kasparavicius Andrius
__
Yes, patch is the program you use for this ;)
You can actualy run somethng like:
patch -p0 < filetopatchkernelwith.wee
That should do it, pray it applies cleanly and run a "make
mrproper" afterwards.
Second issue, the general config from Debian - not a problem. Copy it out
first (before the pa
Yes, patch is the program you use for this ;)
You can actualy run somethng like:
patch -p0 < filetopatchkernelwith.wee
That should do it, pray it applies cleanly and run a "make
mrproper" afterwards.
Second issue, the general config from Debian - not a problem. Copy it out
first (before the p
38 matches
Mail list logo
