Hi Matt:
At 1:06 PM -0500 12/5/02, Matt Simerson wrote:
Kit, you're reinventing the wheel!
Thanks for getting in touch, but the attempt below is actually qmail
with just the SMTP-AUTH patch. I figure if I can't get 1 patch
working, my chances for the rest are pretty low. :}
Yes, there are si
Kit, you're reinventing the wheel!
Yes, there are significant problems with simply merging together a
bunch of the qmail patches. It took me quite some time to get all the
patches I wanted to play nicely together. Now that it's done, feel
free to use it: http://matt.simerson.net/computing/mail
Thanks for the pointers, everybody...
At 11:22 PM -0500 12/3/02, Kit Halsted wrote:
<...>
Tried 0.31 tonight, no luck. Maybe my other patches are interfering?
I'll try it at home as the only patch & see how that goes.
2.) Try to run qmail-smtpd as root. Just for testing, but this avoids
"ac
vchkpw] Re: SMTP-AUTH, yet again...
Thanks for the tips, Peter...
At 11:38 PM +0100 12/3/02, Peter Palmreuther wrote:
>Hello Kit,
>
>On Tuesday, December 3, 2002 at 6:18:35 PM you wrote:
>
>> I have no clue why this is not working
>
>1.) Give 0.31 a try, I don't kn
Thanks for the tips, Peter...
At 11:38 PM +0100 12/3/02, Peter Palmreuther wrote:
Hello Kit,
On Tuesday, December 3, 2002 at 6:18:35 PM you wrote:
I have no clue why this is not working
1.) Give 0.31 a try, I don't know what exactly changed, but the syntax
is different between 0.30 & 0.
Hello Kit,
On Tuesday, December 3, 2002 at 6:18:35 PM you wrote:
> I have no clue why this is not working
1.) Give 0.31 a try, I don't know what exactly changed, but the syntax
is different between 0.30 & 0.31, maybe you're using the 'new'
one, while old (to me unknown) is needed.
2.) Tr
