qmail Digest 26 Aug 1999 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 740
Topics (messages 29421 through 29475):
Modifying the queue: what is safe ?
29421 by: Martin Ouwehand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29422 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29442 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
29443 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29444 by: Martin Ouwehand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[vmailmgr] Announcements on qmail mailing list?
29423 by: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29424 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sending mail
29425 by: "Al Jul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29426 by: Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29429 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29445 by: William Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
why does qmail eat my From headers?
29427 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29428 by: "Timothy L. Mayo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29449 by: "Joel Uckelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tcpserver and qmail-pop3d
29430 by: Robbie Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29451 by: Michael Boyiazis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
supervise questions
29431 by: Matthew Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29432 by: Eric Lammerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29433 by: Sergei Kolobov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29435 by: Matthew Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29438 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
New versions of daemontools (was: supervise questions)
29434 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
virtualdomain, .qmail and signals
29436 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
New daemontools (0.60)
29437 by: Martin Paulucci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Rejecting selected users
29439 by: Dmitry Niqiforoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29440 by: Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29441 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
How to filter passing messages with procmail ..?
29446 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
qmail-pw2u doesn't work.
29447 by: "Hawke Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29448 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Case Sensitive
29450 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SQWebmail....compilation problems...(0.20)
29452 by: Martin Paulucci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Qmail relay.
29453 by: Stefan Krantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29465 by: Mirko Zeibig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29466 by: Mirko Zeibig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Performance hack
29454 by: Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29463 by: Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ezmlm/qmail sending multiple copies??
29455 by: "Theodore Cekan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
sendmail style virtual domains
29456 by: Eric Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29457 by: Dave Sill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29458 by: Peter Gradwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
.deb installation anyone?
29459 by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sander Wissing)
29471 by: "Ol.i Th.uns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
hmm.. is this right?
29460 by: "Racer X" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29461 by: Greg Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29462 by: "Aaron L. Meehan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Patched source for pine 4.1 w/ Maildir support
29464 by: Kai MacTane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Qmail dying
29467 by: "Fred Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29468 by: "Sam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
How do I route email?? smtproute??
29469 by: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Question on big-todo patch
29470 by: Yusuf Goolamabbas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
how to use mess822
29472 by: "x" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
rewrite From: header
29473 by: "x" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
my 1st mail here!
29474 by: "Luka Gerzic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
29475 by: "Olivier M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
One of our user did something strange (and he wasn't available for comment, as the press says), some kind of double loop, where each mail to him would generate two replies (fresh ones, i.e. no way for qmail to detect loops or to many hops) that would bounce, etc. Anyhow, the queue was full of mails no one was ever going to read ( ~12'000 of them). What I did: kill qmail-send, remove info/nnn remote/nnn and *then* mess/nnn (because of the i-node number trick) for each of those useless messages. This took quite some time, but fairly early I noticed that qmail-send was still alive, so I did a "kill -9" of it, but this means that some messages were removed with qmail-send and children running. (qmail-smtpd's were running all along, i.e. I didn't kill tcpserver). How dangerous is this ? Apparently, it did no harm, which drives me to ask: what manipulations of the queue are "safe" with qmail-send and/or qmail-smtpd's running ? Any tips/URL's are welcome. -- | ~~~~~~~~ Martin Ouwehand ~ Swiss Federal Institute of Technology ~ Lausanne __|_________ Email/PGP: http://slwww.epfl.ch/SIC/SL/info/Martin.html __________ Alors que la philosophie enseigne comment l'homme pr�tend penser, la beuverie montre comment il pense vraiment [Ren� Daumal]
On Wed, Aug 25, 1999 at 10:03:32AM -0000, Martin Ouwehand wrote: > One of our user did something strange (and he wasn't available for comment, > as the press says), some kind of double loop, where each mail to him > would generate two replies (fresh ones, i.e. no way for qmail to detect > loops or to many hops) that would bounce, etc. > > Anyhow, the queue was full of mails no one was ever going to read ( ~12'000 > of them). What I did: kill qmail-send, remove info/nnn remote/nnn and *then* > mess/nnn (because of the i-node number trick) for each of those useless > messages. This took quite some time, but fairly early I noticed that > qmail-send was still alive, so I did a "kill -9" of it, but this means > that some messages were removed with qmail-send and children running. > (qmail-smtpd's were running all along, i.e. I didn't kill tcpserver). > > How dangerous is this ? Apparently, it did no harm, which drives me > to ask: what manipulations of the queue are "safe" with qmail-send > and/or qmail-smtpd's running ? Any tips/URL's are welcome. Removing messages from under qmail-send's ass should not give any problems theoretically, just lots of warnings in the logs. kill -9 qmail-send IS a bad thing tho.. you should always just kill qmail-send and _wait_ for it to exit. Greetz, Peter -- | 'He broke my heart, | Peter van Dijk | I broke his neck' | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | nognikz - As the sun | Hardbeat@ircnet - #cistron/#linux.nl | http://www.nognikz.mdk.nu/ | Hardbeat@undernet - #groningen/#kinkfm/#vdh |
On Wed, 25 Aug 1999, Peter van Dijk wrote: [snip] > Removing messages from under qmail-send's ass should not give any problems > theoretically, just lots of warnings in the logs. > > kill -9 qmail-send IS a bad thing tho.. you should always just kill > qmail-send and _wait_ for it to exit. If you're in a hurry, and want qmail-send to exit quickly, kill all the qmail-remote processes after you kill qmail-send (as Peter notes, don't use -9). You may get a few duplicate messages doing this. Your choice whether it's that urgent to shut it down quickly. > Greetz, Peter > -- > | 'He broke my heart, | Peter van Dijk | > I broke his neck' | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | > nognikz - As the sun | Hardbeat@ircnet - #cistron/#linux.nl | > http://www.nognikz.mdk.nu/ | Hardbeat@undernet - #groningen/#kinkfm/#vdh | > -- "Life is much too important to be taken seriously." Thomas Erskine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (613) 998-2836
On Wed, Aug 25, 1999 at 10:25:32AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, 25 Aug 1999, Peter van Dijk wrote: > > [snip] > > Removing messages from under qmail-send's ass should not give any problems > > theoretically, just lots of warnings in the logs. > > > > kill -9 qmail-send IS a bad thing tho.. you should always just kill > > qmail-send and _wait_ for it to exit. > > If you're in a hurry, and want qmail-send to exit quickly, kill all the > qmail-remote processes after you kill qmail-send (as Peter notes, don't > use -9). You may get a few duplicate messages doing this. Your choice > whether it's that urgent to shut it down quickly. Actually, I do that all the time... I hate waiting for a timeout when I can just 'killall qmail-remote'. Just didn't want to tell y'all because it's theoretically bad :) Greetz, Peter -- | 'He broke my heart, | Peter van Dijk | I broke his neck' | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | nognikz - As the sun | Hardbeat@ircnet - #cistron/#linux.nl | http://www.nognikz.mdk.nu/ | Hardbeat@undernet - #groningen/#kinkfm/#vdh |
Peter van Dijk writes: ] kill -9 qmail-send IS a bad thing tho.. Well, isn't it what would happen at shutdown if qmail-send takes to much time to exit after the SIGTERM ? On most systems I know of, shutdown sends a SIGKILL (signal 9) to all processes a measly 5 seconds after sending them SIGTERM. -- | ~~~~~~~~ Martin Ouwehand ~ Swiss Federal Institute of Technology ~ Lausanne __|_________ Email/PGP: http://slwww.epfl.ch/SIC/SL/info/Martin.html __________ We have the technology not available before... But thinkers & poets of the past, oh no, they had to leap in the dark so blindly [P�re Ubu]
Hi, I also agree entirely with this. vmailmgrd deserves more recognition and use, the qmail home page description "IP based" wording does need to be improved if possible, because I avoided vmailmgrd for many months thinking it irrelevant to my needs. I don't know if you get a word limit, but "which implements either IP-based or non IP-based virtual domains." perhaps? As for posting announcements to the qmail list, I think definately yes. Again increases awareness, and to be honest (and I get ready for a large amount of backlash on this one!) vmailmgrd is one of the main reasons I've stuck with qmail for so long. Don't get me wrong, I love qmail, but it appears to me (and I hope I'm wrong) that it has queue management issues under high loads and under certain circumstances (when hotmail went down a couple of months ago and had no secondary MX record for instance). In this particular instance I had to create hotmail.com in my own DNS with false MX records in order to bounce the vast backlog of queued email that was slowing down everyone elses mail. (yeah yeah, I know, hotmails fault for only having one MX record, but still...) Anyway, keep up the good work Bruce! Cheers, Jake. -----Original Message----- From: Olivier M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 August 1999 22:25 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [vmailmgr] Announcements on qmail mailing list? On Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 03:01:35PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote: > Do you think that announcements regarding vmailmgr should also go to the > qmail mailing list? I just noticed that the author of vchkpw (to which > I owe the inspiration for vmailmgr) posts announcements to that list. > Your thoughts? I think it would be nice. This way, people will know that vmailmgrd exists... Because to discover in the qmail.org homepage, you really have to be lucky. The vcheckpw part is much "noticable" than the vmailmgrd. And it says "virtual mail manager package which implements IP-based virtual domains." which isn't correct formulated : you can host so many virtual mail domain on one IP. Just my 0.02 Euro :) Olivier
On Wed, Aug 25, 1999 at 11:31:04AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi, > > I also agree entirely with this. vmailmgrd deserves more recognition and > use, the qmail home page description "IP based" wording does need to be > improved if possible, because I avoided vmailmgrd for many months thinking > it irrelevant to my needs. I don't know if you get a word limit, but "which > implements either IP-based or non IP-based virtual domains." perhaps? > > As for posting announcements to the qmail list, I think definately yes. > Again increases awareness, and to be honest (and I get ready for a large > amount of backlash on this one!) vmailmgrd is one of the main reasons I've > stuck with qmail for so long. > > Don't get me wrong, I love qmail, but it appears to me (and I hope I'm > wrong) that it has queue management issues under high loads and under > certain circumstances (when hotmail went down a couple of months ago and had > no secondary MX record for instance). In this particular instance I had to > create hotmail.com in my own DNS with false MX records in order to bounce > the vast backlog of queued email that was slowing down everyone elses mail. > (yeah yeah, I know, hotmails fault for only having one MX record, but > still...) hotmail's incoming mail is not handled by qmail. Greetz, Peter -- | 'He broke my heart, | Peter van Dijk | I broke his neck' | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | nognikz - As the sun | Hardbeat@ircnet - #cistron/#linux.nl | http://www.nognikz.mdk.nu/ | Hardbeat@undernet - #groningen/#kinkfm/#vdh |
> The message can not be sent because one of the recipient was rejected by the server >.... > Protocol SMTP, server response 553 sorry that domain isn't in my list of allowed >rcpthosts (#5.7.1) ......... In /var/qmail/control there is a file <rcpthosts> where you can put the domains you want to send mail. If you delete this file you can send to every host but it'isnt a good idea because everyone can send mail to everyone (you have a relay open). In www.qmail.org there are some solutions to this problem. Bye! Aljul ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On Wed, Aug 25, 1999 at 04:03:01PM +0800, Joel Gatdula Pira wrote: > > I was able to set up pop3 and my students can get and read their email using > their POP client. > > However, they can not send to other host but mine. > > Below is the error message: > > The message can not be sent because one of the recipient was rejected by the > server .... Protocol SMTP, server response 553 sorry that domain isn't in my > list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1) ......... > > > Is it due to the fact that I don't do relay? See http://www.palomine.net/qmail/relaying.html Chris
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> The message can not be sent because one of the recipient was >> rejected by the server .... >> Protocol SMTP, server response 553 sorry that domain isn't in my >> list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1) ......... > >In /var/qmail/control there is a file <rcpthosts> where you can put >the domains you want to send mail. WRONG! That's *RCPT*hosts: hosts you're willing to *receive* mail for. >If you delete this file you can >send to every host but it'isnt a good idea because everyone can >send mail to everyone (you have a relay open). That's an exceedingly bad idea. >In www.qmail.org there are some solutions to this problem. See also: http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#relaying -Dave
Title: RE: Sending mail[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>In /var/qmail/control there is a file <rcpthosts> where you can put
>>the domains you want to send mail.
>WRONG! That's *RCPT*hosts: hosts you're willing to *receive* mail for.Misleading. The rcpthosts file dictates what domains are valid in a
RCPT TO smtp line. This means two things.
1) Outside SMTP servers and users, when connecting to your smtpd, can only
RCPT TO: specific domains. (read: no spam relaying)
2) INSIDE users can only RCPT TO: specific domains. (read: no sending mail to anyone
outside your own trusted network)There is, of course, a reconciliation between these two worlds that works
quite amiably, using tcpserver and some environment variables, which is outlined
well in many posts to this list and in common Qmail docs.>>If you delete this file you can
>>send to every host but it'isnt a good idea because everyone can
>>send mail to everyone (you have a relay open).
>That's an exceedingly bad idea.
I concur. Look on qmail.org under "allowing selective relaying" or some such
to get around your problem in a good fashion.Bill Johnson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Hmm. That is curious. I'm running 1.03, no patches. Is there any way I could >have configured qmail to cause this? If not, do you have any >suggestions about what could be happening here? Russ Nelson pointed out that fetchmail and sendmail had both had a hand on the example message you posted. Both are notorious header mungers. -Dave
As 2 others correctly pointed out, qmail-inject with remove and replace your From: header if you have certain options turned on in the QMAILINJECT environment variable. (My oversight earlier.) In addition to the fetchmail and sendmail hosts pointed out, do you have QMAILINJECT set in your environment when invoking qmail-inject and if so, what is it set to? On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Here's the entire message as it comes back to me: > > ========= start of message ========= > Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Delivery-Date: Wed Aug 25 04:51:01 1999 > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Received: (qmail 12860 invoked from network); 25 Aug 1999 04:51:01 -0000 > Received: from lyon-183-134.res.iastate.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > by lyon-183-134.res.iastate.edu with SMTP; 25 Aug 1999 04:51:01 -0000 > Received: from pop-2.iastate.edu > by lyon-183-134.res.iastate.edu with POP3 (fetchmail-5.0.5) > for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (single-drop); Tue, 24 Aug > 1999 23:51:01 -0500 (CDT) > Received: from vladimir.iastate.edu (lyon-183-134.res.iastate.edu > [129.186.183.134]) > by pop-2.iastate.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id XAA17901 > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 23:50:52 -0500 (CDT) > Received: (qmail 12851 invoked by uid 0); 25 Aug 1999 04:50:42 -0000 > Date: 25 Aug 1999 04:50:42 -0000 > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > X-UIDL: c9145b0842c615664d7a693ebe66b61e > ========= end of message ========= > > Does this help? > -- > J. Uckelman > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.public.iastate.edu/~uckelman/ > > > --------------------------------- Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Administrator localconnect(sm) http://www.localconnect.net/ The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/ One Monroeville Center, Suite 850 Monroeville, PA 15146 (412) 810-8888 Phone (412) 810-8886 Fax
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Hmm. That is curious. I'm running 1.03, no patches. Is there any way I could > >have configured qmail to cause this? If not, do you have any > >suggestions about what could be happening here? > > Russ Nelson pointed out that fetchmail and sendmail had both had a > hand on the example message you posted. Both are notorious header > mungers. > > -Dave As you can see, it works now. Thanks, everyone, for the help. It appears that setting QMAILINJECT to 'f' solved the problem. As for what was actually the cause, I'm certain it wasn't fetchmail -- when I sent the same message to my roommate, the result was the same, despite that he uses Eudora. Secondly, everyone else's From's seem to be ok. I would be very strange if fetchmail altered my From's and no others. Again, thanks much for the help!
man tcpserver No, you don't have to use the -x option to tcpserver. It's up to you. At 03:13 AM 8/25/99 , you wrote: >Is there a reason why I have the check of the rules.cdb in my pop3d >line of tcpserver other than to slow everything down? Theoretically >we allow pop from anywhere (and the rules call on the pop3d line doesn't >seem to be preventing anything [but maybe quicker downloads])... > >/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -c 2050 -x /etc/security/tcprules/rules.cdb 0 >pop3 >/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup pop.netzero.net /bin/checkpassword >/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popbull /var/spool/bulletins >/var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir & > >the above all being on one line of course... > >Thanks, >-- >mike b. --------------------------------------------------------------- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.sprynet.com/~boyiazis/mikehome.htm > >"I propose we leave math to the machines and go play outside." Calvin >----------------------------------------------------------------------- >________________________________________________________ >NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet. Shouldn't you? >Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at >http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html ______________________ NovaMetrix Development Robbie Walker, AMWL P.O. Box 635 or 910-653-4006 106-B S. Main St 800-773-5647 Tabor City, NC 28463 910-653-2052 FAX
Title: RE: tcpserver and qmail-pop3dI do use it for my smtp to control relay,
but is it actually used in pop3d? It appears
that it is ignored or not applicable to pop3d.mike b. ---------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED]NetZero
Mail/Sys/Network Admin
>
> man tcpserver
>
> No, you don't have to use the -x option to tcpserver. It's up to you.
>
> At 03:13 AM 8/25/99 , you wrote:
> >Is there a reason why I have the check of the rules.cdb in my pop3d
> >line of tcpserver other than to slow everything down? Theoretically
> >we allow pop from anywhere (and the rules call on the pop3d
> line doesn't
> >seem to be preventing anything [but maybe quicker downloads])...
> >
> >/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -c 2050 -x
> /etc/security/tcprules/rules.cdb 0
> >pop3
> >/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup pop.netzero.net /bin/checkpassword
> >/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popbull /var/spool/bulletins
> >/var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir &
> >
> >the above all being on one line of course...
> >
> >Thanks,
Hi, I'm having problems with supervise and I was hoping someone could offer me some quick advice on how to fix it. I have a machine where syslogd keeps dying so I'm attempting to use supervise to control keeping it up. As root I created the directory /var/run/syslog and ran supervise /var/run/syslog /usr/sbin/syslogd An instance starts up but then I get a whole screen full of syslogd: Already running. messages. When I try to kill it with "svc -d /var/run/syslog" or "svc -k /var/run/syslog" it looks like it kills that instance but then it starts up another and I keep getting the above messages. The only way I found to stop it was to kill the supervise command. I tried it also with named and ended up getting about ten instances of named before I killed it. What am I doing wrong here? thanks for any help -- Matthew Harrell Another Month's End: Bit Twiddlers, Inc. All Targets Met [EMAIL PROTECTED] All Systems Working All Customers Satisfied All Staff Enthusiastic All Pigs Fed And Ready To Fly
On Wed, 25 Aug 1999, Matthew Harrell wrote: > created the directory /var/run/syslog and ran > > supervise /var/run/syslog /usr/sbin/syslogd Syslogd puts itself in the background. Supervise then thinks the syslogd died and starts another. Use the -n switch of syslogd to avoid auto-backgrounding. Eric -- Eric Lammerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Matthew Harrell wrote: > created the directory /var/run/syslog and ran > > supervise /var/run/syslog /usr/sbin/syslogd > > An instance starts up but then I get a whole screen full of > > syslogd: Already running. Did you check to see if syslogd was already started from system startup script (/etc/rc or similar). If so, just do # killall syslogd -- Sergei Kolobov
: : 1. Check if you can prevent your syslogd from daemonizing; see the manpage. Got it. That didn't even occur to me when I was looking at it. : 2. Check out Dan's new daemontools-0.60 package and see if : : ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/daemontools/fghack.html : : works for you. Will do. Looks like I'm way out of date since I'm only using 0.53. Thanks for the help. -- Matthew Harrell Behind every great computer sits Bit Twiddlers, Inc. a skinny little geek. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Matthew Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >: >: 2. Check out Dan's new daemontools-0.60 package and see if >: >: ftp://koobera.math.uic.edu/www/daemontools/fghack.html >: >: works for you. > >Will do. Looks like I'm way out of date since I'm only using 0.53. No, 0.60 just came out today, and there was nothing between 0.53 and 0.60. Also, since 0.60 is brand new and quite different, it'll take a while for documentation like "Life with qmail" to catch up. -Dave
Note that there's a new version of daemontools available: >From: "D. J. Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: daemontools 0.60 available >Date: 25 Aug 1999 02:31:14 -0000 > >A new version of daemontools is available through > > http://pobox.com/~djb/daemontools.html > >Beware that almost the entire interface has changed. > >---Dan
Hi qmail users, I have configured a virtual domain for processing the messages through a filter and then re-send them. I used a classic solution with a .qmail file: virtualdomains: debug:debug .qmail-debug-default: | myfilter | qmail-inject -f "$SENDER" -- "$DEFAULT" This solution works fine but I have some doubts about the behaviour when the filter script (myfilter) finishes unexpectedly. If the script receives a signal (managed or not) that forces it to finish, qmail-inject will simply understand that the message's body has finished and will send a incomplete message. The original body will be lost forever. I explored a solution catching the signal in the script. The signal handler sends a new signal (INT) to finish qmail-inject with a proper error code for showing that the message hasn't been delivered. Now there is my problem: Which is the proper qmail-inject's pid? We can't use the group pid because all qmail processes belongs to qmail-send's group. We can try with parent pid (qmail-inject process is the myfilter's process parent) but if qmail-inject finishes before the script, this could send signals to the "init" (the parent for orphans). Do you have any signal reliable solution ? Thanks in advance for your help, David Jorrin. PD: Please send me a copy by e-mail. Thanks again. ==== David Jorrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "This chapter is about Laziness, Impatience and Hubris because this chapter is about good software design" Larry Wall, Tom Christiansen & Randal L. Schwartz [Programming Perl] ---------------------------------------------------------------- Get your free email from AltaVista at http://altavista.iname.com
Hi! Somebody know how to change the init script for qmail to use daemontools .60, because they way they work changed a lot...and I'm having trouble moving from the old one. Thanks!..
Hello! Is it possible to configure qmail to reject mail from selected (outside) users. For example, I have 'kraft-s.ru' domain and I'd like to deny user [EMAIL PROTECTED] to send any messages to our users. Any suggestions? ________________________________________________________ Regards, Dmitry Niqiforoff [tel. +7 8462 427427] Kraft-S, Ltd. Samara, Russia
On Wed, Aug 25, 1999 at 07:19:01PM +0500, Dmitry Niqiforoff wrote: > Hello! > > Is it possible to configure qmail to reject mail from selected > (outside) users. For example, I have 'kraft-s.ru' domain and I'd > like to deny user [EMAIL PROTECTED] to send any messages to our > users. Any suggestions? echo [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> /var/qmail/control/badmailfrom or, to ban all hotmail.com: echo @hotmail.com >> /var/qmail/control/badmailfrom Greetz, Peter -- | 'He broke my heart, | Peter van Dijk | I broke his neck' | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | nognikz - As the sun | Hardbeat@ircnet - #cistron/#linux.nl | http://www.nognikz.mdk.nu/ | Hardbeat@undernet - #groningen/#kinkfm/#vdh |
Dmitry Niqiforoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is it possible to configure qmail to reject mail from selected >(outside) users. For example, I have 'kraft-s.ru' domain and I'd >like to deny user [EMAIL PROTECTED] to send any messages to our >users. Any suggestions? Yes, see: http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#badmailfrom -Dave
Hi, I would like to use procmail with qmail for the following purposes : I'm using qmail only for relaying mail messages. [ thus no local mail users are exist, except the postmaster and some test users ] I would like to use procmail to filter the incoming [ actually passing ] mails and do different things with certain messages. How to spawn procmail to "catch" incoming messages as it only starts when a local delivery happens. Is procmail/qmail able to handle this ? ( i guess it is ) Thanks in advance, pH
When I run qmailpw-2u, it just sits there doing nothing, I have to CTRL-C it to get back to the prompt, and it never modifies the assign file. Suggestions please? -hawke
"Hawke Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >When I run qmailpw-2u, it just sits there doing nothing, I have to CTRL-C it >to get back to the prompt, and it never modifies the assign file. >Suggestions please? qmail-pw2u operates on standard input and output, so do something like: qmail-pw2u </etc/passwd >assign -Dave
Subject: RE: Case Sensitive On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Daniluk, Cris wrote: Hi all of you, Thank you all very much for this discussion I learned a lot from that. The buttom line of it all is: I USE QMAIL and I cannot use capital letters in my local email accounts. I accept that as the way it all works. Thanks again for the help. Jacob Subject: RE: Case Sensitive On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Daniluk, Cris wrote: Hi all of you, Thank you all very much for this discussion I learned a lot from that. The buttom line of it all is: I USE QMAIL and I cannot use capital letters in my local email accounts. I accept that as the way it all works. Thanks again for the help. Jacob >>> This is very inaccurate. >>> I spent the last week reading over the SMTP RFC and >>> here's a quote from page 3 section 2: >>> [quote from rfc822] >>>You are rigtht. I was wrong. >>>The SMTP is clear on the case sensitivity. >>>But I hope that people don't draw false conclusions from this. >>>Neither about me or how the should use the case-freedom >>>the the SMTP protocol gives them ;-)
Hi, I'm sorry if this is out of the limits of the list, but I couldn't find any list for SQWebmail... After I ran the .configure like this: ./configure --with-vchkpw=yes --enable-maxpurge=30 --with-htmllibdir=/mail/webmail --enable-cgibindir=/usr/local/apache/cgi-bin --enable-hostname=webmail --enable-bannerprog=prog --with-maxargsize=1000000 -with-maxformargsize=1000000 (I had to take out some parameters, if not, it wouldn't take it). Is sqwebmail checking for ispell in /usr/local/bin???. I ran: # make make all-recursive Making all in maildir gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -g -O2 -Wall -c maildircreate.c gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -g -O2 -Wall -c maildircreateh.c gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -g -O2 -Wall -c maildirgetquota.c gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -g -O2 -Wall -c maildirparsequota.c gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -g -O2 -Wall -c maildirquota.c gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -g -O2 -Wall -c maildirrequota.c rm -f libmaildir.a ar cru libmaildir.a maildircreate.o maildircreateh.o maildirgetquota.o maildirparsequota.o maildirquota.o maildirrequota.o ranlib libmaildir.a gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I. -g -O2 -Wall -c deliverquota.c gcc -g -O2 -Wall -o deliverquota deliverquota.o libmaildir.a ./html2man.pl <deliverquota.html >deliverquota.8 sh: ./html2man.pl: not found *** Error code 1 make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `deliverquota.8' Current working directory /root/pkgs/mail_server/sqwebmail-0.20/maildir *** Error code 1 make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `all-recursive' Current working directory /root/pkgs/mail_server/sqwebmail-0.20 *** Error code 1 make: Fatal error: Command failed for target `all-recursive-am' And got this. Any idea?. It seems that html2man.pl is not there... but it is.....:((( Many thanks in advance!!!
Hi! Is it possible to configure qmail to send relay messages to more than one destination? We have two identical internal mail servers (behind fw), and we've got qmail machines (on a dmz) as relays. We want qmail to send every relayed email to both internal servers, instead of one of them. Is it possible? Thanks, -- Windows isn't a virus, viruses do something ... Stefan Krantz / [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4096/1024 Diffie-Hellman/DSS KeyID: 0x889714FD Fingerprint: 2DDB CB46 CC22 C6EA BEC5 4ABD CC07 9A37 8897 14FD
On Wed, Aug 25, 1999 at 07:45:47PM +0200, Stefan Krantz wrote: > We have two identical internal mail servers (behind fw), and we've got > qmail machines (on a dmz) as relays. We want qmail to send every relayed > email to both internal servers, instead of one of them. > Is it possible? Maybe you could enter the two internals in smtproutes (man qmail-remote) like this: :first.server.com :secnd.server.com Regards Mirko
Pardon me, of course it should better be sth. like this: your-domain.com:first.your-domain.com your-domain.com:secnd.your-domain.com Regards Mirko
Attached is a small performance hack to qmail-remote. It simply disables the delayed ack for tcp connections. Speeds the beginning of the data transfer phase up by about 0.5 seconds. The effect is a little bit depending on your platform. On FreeBSD it almost doubles the number of messages that can be sent in a certain amount of time (in my test environment). It helps most if you have lots of small messages. Got the TCP-NODELAY tip from a different discussion on the FreeBSD ML and the conclusion there was that it helps most on *BSD, Solaris and basically all other unices exept Linux. I have no idea why that and it doesn't really matter because in this aspect Linux is also fine w/o this optimization (well, it doesn't hurt, the gain is just not so high). I'd like to see how much it speeds huge mailing lists up (I don't have huge ML). This will be also included in next qmail-ldap. -- Andre % cvs diff -u -r1.1 qmail-remote.c Index: qmail-remote.c =================================================================== RCS file: /usr/home/opi/CVS/qmail-ldap/qmail-remote.c,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.3 --- qmail-remote.c 1999/03/23 19:40:09 1.1 +++ qmail-remote.c 1999/08/25 17:59:28 1.3 @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/socket.h> #include <netinet/in.h> +#include <netinet/tcp.h> #include <arpa/inet.h> #include "sig.h" #include "stralloc.h" @@ -413,6 +414,9 @@ smtpfd = socket(AF_INET,SOCK_STREAM,0); if (smtpfd == -1) temp_oserr(); + + /* performace hack to send TCP ACK's without delay */ + setsockopt(smtpfd, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, &smtpfd, sizeof smtpfd); if (timeoutconn(smtpfd,&ip.ix[i].ip,(unsigned int) port,timeoutconnect) == 0) { tcpto_err(&ip.ix[i].ip,0);
Oh well, I'm a little bit stupid today... Forgot to check the real patch into cvs. This is the actual working patch I used for my tests: % cvs diff -u -r1.1 qmail-remote.c Index: qmail-remote.c =================================================================== RCS file: /usr/home/opi/CVS/qmail-ldap/qmail-remote.c,v retrieving revision 1.1 retrieving revision 1.4 diff -u -r1.1 -r1.4 --- qmail-remote.c 1999/03/23 19:40:09 1.1 +++ qmail-remote.c 1999/08/25 21:32:28 1.4 @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/socket.h> #include <netinet/in.h> +#include <netinet/tcp.h> #include <arpa/inet.h> #include "sig.h" #include "stralloc.h" @@ -332,6 +333,7 @@ { static ipalloc ip = {0}; int i; + int tcpnodelay = 1; unsigned long random; char **recips; unsigned long prefme; @@ -413,6 +415,9 @@ smtpfd = socket(AF_INET,SOCK_STREAM,0); if (smtpfd == -1) temp_oserr(); + + /* performace hack to send TCP ACK's without delay */ + setsockopt(smtpfd, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, &tcpnodelay, sizeof tcpnodelay); if (timeoutconn(smtpfd,&ip.ix[i].ip,(unsigned int) port,timeoutconnect) == 0) { tcpto_err(&ip.ix[i].ip,0);
Hi, I have an interesting problem. I have a client using ezmlm to email about 15,000 subscribers on a weekly basis. This is the second week they sent their email. The first week went fine, logs showed everyone received their email. Second week many ppl got this weeks, and a copy of last weeks. Logs showed everyone was sent, and received, _one_ email. I am using qmailanalog to parse the maillog. Where else can I look for any logs, or why else might this happen? They are considering sending an explanation to the list, but obviously they dont want copies of all three messages going out again. Any help is much appreciated. Ted Cekan
In sendmail 8.9 I can use the following line in sendmail Virtual Domains <domain.com>:$1@<otherdomain.com> This would basically redirect the mail from the first domain for the user to the user account at the other domain that I want it forwarded to. In browsing through the qmail docutmentation I do not see anything to do that. Can someone just point me in the right direction for how to do this. Thank you very much... -Eric Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >In sendmail 8.9 I can use the following line in sendmail Virtual Domains ><domain.com>:$1@<otherdomain.com> >This would basically redirect the mail from the first domain for the >user to the user account at the other domain that I want it forwarded >to. In browsing through the qmail docutmentation I do not see anything >to do that. Add domain.com to rcpthosts and put the following in smtproutes: domain.com:otherdomain.com -Dave
At 2:14 pm -0400 25/8/99,the wonderful Eric Davis wrote: >In sendmail 8.9 I can use the following line in sendmail Virtual Domains ><domain.com>:$1@<otherdomain.com> >This would basically redirect the mail from the first domain for the >user to the user account at the other domain that I want it forwarded >to. In browsing through the qmail docutmentation I do not see anything >to do that. deliver it to a .qmail file and put this in the file: | forward "$DEFAULT"@otherdomain.com peter -- peter at gradwell dot com; http://www.gradwell.com/ gradwell dot com Ltd. Enabling the internet you don't see.
Hi all, I am sure this is a FAQ, so if there is a FAQ please just point me to it, but can anyone point me towards a .deb installation of qmail somewhere? Thanks Sander Sander Wissing Jaguar 22 #4039 - Dreamfar Summer is coming to South Africa!
>Hi all, > >I am sure this is a FAQ, so if there is a FAQ please just point me to >it, but can anyone point me towards a .deb installation of qmail >somewhere? There is a qmail-src 1.03 in potato (unstable) (I think 1.02 in slink / Debian 2.1). Just do a 'apt-get install qmail-src', 'build-qmail' which builds the qmail package and then 'dpkg -i qmail' (it's in a tmp directory). It shouldn't be a problem to use qmail-src 1.03 from potato with slink. You could also fetch the file by hand and do a 'dpkg -i qmail-src_1.03-?.deb. Then you could edit the /etc/init.d/qmail file, because the default is to use procmail for local delivery. I prefer ./Maildirs and if you use them, you should also use the qmail-pop3d. There is a line you could comment out in init.d/qmail to start the qmail-pop3d. Oliver Oliver
I'm getting a lot of bounces to postmaster from some dumb mail client that isn't setting the To: or From: headers. I tested this out: telnet localhost 25 MAIL FROM: <> RCPT TO: <> DATA blah . qmail-smtpd accepts that, and then delivers a double bounce to postmaster. I'd rather it just not accept the mail in the first place. In this particular case, the dumb client is one of our customers, so I can go yell at them, but I'm kinda curious as to how this should be handled. Is there something obvious I'm missing here? shag ===== Judd Bourgeois | CNM Network +1 (805) 520-7170 Software Architect | 1900 Los Angeles Avenue, 2nd Floor [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Simi Valley, CA 93065 Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
> I'm getting a lot of bounces to postmaster from some dumb > mail client that isn't setting the To: or From: headers. > I tested this out: > > telnet localhost 25 > MAIL FROM: <> > RCPT TO: <> I can't speak to the "RCPT TO", but "MAIL FROM: <>" is legal and is the method RFC 821 suggests to keep bounces from bouncing: "Section 3.6: ... This notification message must be from the server-SMTP at this host. Of course, server-SMTPs should not send notification messages about problems with notification messages. One way to prevent loops in error reporting is to specify a null reverse-path in the MAIL command of a notification message. When such a message is relayed it is permissible to leave the reverse-path null. A MAIL command with a null reverse-path appears as follows: MAIL FROM:<>" Some sites have started disallowing this as an anti-SPAM measure. Personally I think that is more trouble than it is worth. -- gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Racer X ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > I'm getting a lot of bounces to postmaster from some dumb mail client that > isn't setting the To: or From: headers. I tested this out: > > telnet localhost 25 > MAIL FROM: <> > RCPT TO: <> > DATA > blah > . > > qmail-smtpd accepts that, and then delivers a double bounce to postmaster. > I'd rather it just not accept the mail in the first place. In this > particular case, the dumb client is one of our customers, so I can go yell > at them, but I'm kinda curious as to how this should be handled. > > Is there something obvious I'm missing here? When I try this, no message is delivered at all, as evidenced by the mail log: 935615243.553990 info msg 153782: bytes 184 from <> qp 12805 uid 51 935615243.571528 starting delivery 600332: msg 153782 to local @cois.coinet.com 935615243.571639 status: local 1/30 remote 0/45 935615243.803298 delivery 600332: success: Aaron
Text written by James Smallacombe at 04:13 PM 8/21/99 -0400: > >After a coupla days of screwing around and a pointer from Ragnar Kjorstad, >I finally got the various patches to work with pine 4.1. If Russ still >wants to put it up on the qmail site, or if anybody else wants to check it >out, the patched source is at: http://3.am/pine4.10.maildir.tar.gz > >It builds and runs fine under FreeBSD 3.2 (-bsf) and Solaris 2.6 with gcc >2.8.1 (-gs5) Well, it also compiles and builds fine under Red Hat LInux (version 5.1, 2.0.34 kernel). It runs, too, and reads my old mail and sends new mail just fine. One thing I can't seem to get it to do is read the Maildir. I've tried setting the inbox-path config variable to /home/kmactane/Maildir, ~/Maildir, ~/Maildir/, ./Maildir, ./Maildir/, ~/Maildir/new, and ~/Maildir/new/. For each one, I get the message "Can't open <directory>: not a selectable folder" when I try to open INBOX. Any ideas? ----------------------------------------------------------------- Kai MacTane System Administrator Online Partners.com, Inc. ----------------------------------------------------------------- >From the Jargon File: (v4.0.0, 25 Jul 1996) fix /n.,v./ What one does when a problem has been reported too many times to be ignored.
Qmail keeps dying completely, leaving no qmail processes running, or partly dying where the processes look fine, but no mail is sent remotely. The logs show nothing out of the ordinary, and just stop when it stops. Can someone tell me what steps to take to find out what's causing this? -- Fred Jones IAJ Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
Fred Jones writes: > Qmail keeps dying completely, leaving no qmail processes running, or partly > dying where the processes look fine, but no mail is sent remotely. > > The logs show nothing out of the ordinary, and just stop when it stops. > > Can someone tell me what steps to take to find out what's causing this? Attach strace to all processes. Redirect their output somewhere where you have plenty of disk space. Wait for them to die. -- Sam
Hi I had a spamming problem and there is a host that could not be protected so I block all smtp traffic to that server. Problem is that the server could not received emails, so I set qmail on my serverA so that it will receive emails for serverB. How do I route all emails to that serverB using qmail?? I already put a MX pointing to serverA to receive email for serverB. Is there a way?? Thanks for being patience with me Kayleigh
Hi, My todo directory has grown to around 7000 files and I am considering using the big-todo patch. I have never used it Do I just stop qmail, apply the patch and reinstall or do I have to munge the queue. If I have to munge the queue, what is the magic incantation to keep exisiting messages safe Cheers, Yusuf -- Yusuf Goolamabbas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hi all, i just installed qmail on my test server and i'm interested in moveing my ISP to support qmail. i'll send some questions about that later. here are my questions for first time: 1. is qmail familiar with long names (8-12 characters) 2. is qmail familiar with mbox spec. box size (i like to range size of message to 6Mb's) 3. is qmail familiar with all pop3's ? 4. and last for now, what's the best pop3d for qmail? is there qmail pop3? where can i get it ? * there is specific situation at my place, i have 2 mail servers and just one doing all job.. when 1st go down becouse some reason, second is up and there is no mailloss for me, that's working fine with sendmail, is there option to qmail that mail is duplicated on other server for backup? thank you all for help
Hi Luka, On Thu, Aug 26, 1999 at 11:31:36AM +0200, Luka Gerzic wrote: > 1. is qmail familiar with long names (8-12 characters) no problem > 2. is qmail familiar with mbox spec. box size (i like to range size of > message to 6Mb's) qmail supports both Mailbox and Maildir support. > 3. is qmail familiar with all pop3's ? with some ln -s /home/user/Mailbox /var/spool/mail/user, yes. but you'd better use the qmail pop deamon > 4. and last for now, what's the best pop3d for qmail? is there qmail pop3? > where can i get it ? it is included with qmail. you should read the qmail faq and the "Life with qmail" document, both available on http://www.qmail.org > * there is specific situation at my place, i have 2 mail servers and just > one doing all job.. when 1st go > down becouse some reason, second is up and there is no mailloss for me, > that's working fine with > sendmail, is there option to qmail that mail is duplicated on other > server for backup? which mails ? the users's mail, or the mailqueue ? Good luck with qmail :) Olivier
