Wietse Venema put forth on 2/7/2011 1:05 PM:
> getpwnam() is not a good example because Postfix uses proxymap from
> inside the jail, but you get the idea.
Here's a good example Wietse, one you helped me figure out/fix a couple of years
ago. Before Lenny (Released Feb 2009), Debian didn't create
Daniel Bromberg put forth on 2/7/2011 12:39 PM:
> Finally, how does one use Postfix properly in the possessive? "Postfix's,
> Postfixs', Postfix', and Postfixes" all look wrong.
Go the Romance language route and use "of". Example, instead of using
Postfix' smtpd_foo_restrictions
use
smtpd_foo
Mark Alan:
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 14:21:39 -0500 (EST), Wietse Venema
> wrote:
>
> > Except for all those beginners that get into trouble because they
> > use someone elses cookbook instructions instead of their own
> > expertise.
>
> And instead of being continuously consumed by same beginner que
On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 14:21:39 -0500 (EST), Wietse Venema
wrote:
> Except for all those beginners that get into trouble because they
> use someone elses cookbook instructions instead of their own
> expertise.
And instead of being continuously consumed by same beginner questions,
wouldn't it be easi
Le 07/02/2011 12:06, Mark Alan a écrit :
>[snip]
>
> No disrespect intended neither towards Stefan, nor towards his
> friends.
>
> But, to us, it would be difficult to use a Postfix repository that
> includes changes whose rationale we are not able to understand like, for
> instance, the followin
Christian Roessner:
> >> For the sake of curiosity and education, why is running chroot'd Postfix
> >> complicated?
> >
> > Late binding. Cyrus SASL may dynamically load plugins. Table drivers may
> > dynamically do hostname lookups, CA certificates may need to retrieved, ...
> >
> > The more fe
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 08:15:49PM +0100, Christian Roessner wrote:
> But I also could say: The more features you enable, the more experienced
> you probably are.
You could also say something just to disagree or make the last point.
--
Viktor.
>> For the sake of curiosity and education, why is running chroot'd Postfix
>> complicated?
>
> Late binding. Cyrus SASL may dynamically load plugins. Table drivers may
> dynamically do hostname lookups, CA certificates may need to retrieved, ...
>
> The more features you enable that use externa
Mark Alan:
> A quick google search shows that, for years, Wietse have been answering
> questions related with users trying to use chrooted parts of Postfix.
>
> But, I wonder, in his machines does he use chroot or not?
Wietse:
> > Indeed I do, helped by an OS that requires few files in the postfix
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 01:39:18PM -0500, Daniel Bromberg wrote:
> For the sake of curiosity and education, why is running chroot'd Postfix
> complicated?
Late binding. Cyrus SASL may dynamically load plugins. Table drivers may
dynamically do hostname lookups, CA certificates may need to retriev
On 2/7/2011 1:22 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Mark Alan:
A quick google search shows that, for years, Wietse have been answering
questions related with users trying to use chrooted parts of Postfix.
But, I wonder, in his machines does he use chroot or not?
Indeed I do, helped by an OS that require
Mark Alan:
> A quick google search shows that, for years, Wietse have been answering
> questions related with users trying to use chrooted parts of Postfix.
>
> But, I wonder, in his machines does he use chroot or not?
Indeed I do, helped by an OS that requires few files in the postfix
jail (etc/
* Mark Alan :
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 17:49:38 +0100, Stefan Foerster
> Apparently you did so just to cope with the novice user that does
> not know how to use MySQL with Postfix chrooted services.
Believe me, nothing is more annyoing than seeing other people
suffering from chroot related problems.
On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 17:49:38 +0100, Stefan Foerster
wrote:
> [chroot disabled]
> ... and the mysql client libraries
> will then try to use the unix socket. This socket is, of course, not
> present in the chroot.>
> Now I know there are better ways around this - use proxymap(8), e.g.,
> but frankl
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 05:49:38PM +0100, Stefan Foerster wrote:
> * Mark Alan :
> > On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 22:22:52 +0100, Patrick Ben Koetter
> > wrote:
> >
> > > If there are "significant differences that are not Debian
> > > related" Stefan certainly has had reasons to add them.
> >
> > That's
* Robert Schetterer :
> whatever, i use this debs they are up and running,
> in ubuntu lucid
You should not use these packages on Ubuntu - they lack some of the
necessary triggers like e.g. ufw.
Cheers
Stefan
* Mark Alan :
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 22:22:52 +0100, Patrick Ben Koetter
> wrote:
>
> > If there are "significant differences that are not Debian related"
> > Stefan certainly has had reasons to add them.
>
> That's certainly a way to view things and I respect your opinion.
>
> But it is hard to
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 18:52:15 +, Mark Alan
wrote:
> Do you know any reliable Debian/Ubuntu repositories for the
> newest Postfix 2.8?
[SOLVED]
For now we will use Christian Roessner's http://mysourceco.de
Ubuntu repository.
Our servers run on Ubuntu 10.04 & 10.10, so to install/upgrade to
Pos
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 23:42:39 -0600, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> If you're capable of determining that Stefan is unreliable, you
> should also be capable of building your own reliable package, or
> that's what I'd expect, anyway.
I am. We are.
But as you very well know, one of the first rules of Open So
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 22:22:52 +0100, Patrick Ben Koetter
wrote:
> If there are "significant differences that are not Debian related"
> Stefan certainly has had reasons to add them.
That's certainly a way to view things and I respect your opinion.
But it is hard to see the rationale in, for instan
On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 00:40:16 -0500, Victor Duchovni
wrote:
> Debian Postfix has significant integration enhancements, dynamic
> loading of table drivers, Debian-specific SASL configuration
> directory, hostname setting in external file, ... Debian users should
> probably not build directly from un
Am 06.02.2011 21:51, schrieb Mark Alan:
> On Sun, 06 Feb 2011 20:01:17 +0100, Robert Schetterer
> wrote:
>
>>> Do you know any reliable Debian/Ubuntu repositories for the
>>> newest Postfix 2.8?
>>
>> http://debian.incertum.net/
>
> Thank you, but the emphasis in my question was in 'reliable'.
>
Hi,
> Do you know any reliable Debian/Ubuntu repositories for the
> newest Postfix 2.8?
http://mysourceco.de
Is my repo. Clean patches to Postfix. It is in fact cloned from the Debian
2.7.0, but with review!
It also has Dovecot 2.09+Pigeonhole in it.
Regards
Christian
---
Roessner-Network-S
> * Mark Alan :
> > > > Do you know any reliable Debian/Ubuntu repositories for the
> > > > newest Postfix 2.8?
> > >
> > > http://debian.incertum.net/
> >
> > Thank you, but the emphasis in my question was in 'reliable'.
And that was the answer you got.
> > A quick diff between the 2.8 sources
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 10:14:13PM +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 20:51:55 +, Mark Alan
> wrote:
>
> > As such and for now http://debian.incertum.net/ must be seen as its
> > latin name implies incertum (=uncertain, irregular, unreliable)
>
> make a bump version request o
"Patrick Ben Koetter" wrote:
>* Mark Alan :
>> > > Do you know any reliable Debian/Ubuntu repositories for the
>> > > newest Postfix 2.8?
>> >
>> > http://debian.incertum.net/
>>
>> Thank you, but the emphasis in my question was in 'reliable'.
>>
>> A quick diff between the 2.8 sources and p
* Mark Alan :
> > > Do you know any reliable Debian/Ubuntu repositories for the
> > > newest Postfix 2.8?
> >
> > http://debian.incertum.net/
>
> Thank you, but the emphasis in my question was in 'reliable'.
>
> A quick diff between the 2.8 sources and patches at
> http://debian.incertum.net/ an
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 20:51:55 +, Mark Alan
wrote:
> As such and for now http://debian.incertum.net/ must be seen as its
> latin name implies incertum (=uncertain, irregular, unreliable)
make a bump version request on debian lunchpad, but maybe only freebsd and
gentoo supports it
unpack source
On Sun, 06 Feb 2011 20:01:17 +0100, Robert Schetterer
wrote:
> > Do you know any reliable Debian/Ubuntu repositories for the
> > newest Postfix 2.8?
>
> http://debian.incertum.net/
Thank you, but the emphasis in my question was in 'reliable'.
A quick diff between the 2.8 sources and patches at
Am 06.02.2011 19:52, schrieb Mark Alan:
> Hello,
>
>
> Do you know any reliable Debian/Ubuntu repositories for the
> newest Postfix 2.8?
>
> Regards,
>
> M.
http://debian.incertum.net/
--
Best Regards
MfG Robert Schetterer
Germany/Munich/Bavaria
Hello,
Do you know any reliable Debian/Ubuntu repositories for the
newest Postfix 2.8?
Regards,
M.
31 matches
Mail list logo
