qmail Digest 21 Oct 1999 10:00:01 -0000 Issue 796
Topics (messages 31871 through 31920):
qmail logs
31871 by: shajain
31873 by: Magnus Bodin
31874 by: Dave Sill
31875 by: Einar Bordewich
Re: Concurrencyremote for a specific host
31872 by: Markus Stumpf
31876 by: Russell Nelson
31917 by: Anand Buddhdev
31920 by: Tony Gale
Re: Disk Space
31877 by: harold.nb.com.sg ()
How to apply a patch
31878 by: Ari Arantes Filho
31880 by: Dave Sill
qmail and fetchmail
31879 by: Daniel Cukier
31881 by: Dave Sill
31897 by: Michael Taylor
31898 by: Dave Sill
31907 by: Mirko Zeibig
this dam list
31882 by: Chris Santerre
31883 by: Gianluca Baldo
31885 by: Russell Nelson
31909 by: Albert Hopkins
Re: this dam(N) list
31884 by: jgordon.lhtech-inc.com
Re: this dam(N)(ED) list
31886 by: Dave Sill
31900 by: Nagendra Mishr
31901 by: Justin Bell
31906 by: Dustin Marquess
31908 by: Justin Bell
dot in names
31887 by: Marthe Nes�en Gangfl�t
31889 by: Nagy Balazs
31890 by: Thorkild Stray
31891 by: Peter Green
31892 by: Marthe Nes�en Gangfl�t
Server dropping SMTP connections
31888 by: Raccah.corp.visto.com
Header Skelter (was: Re: this dam(N)(ED) list)
31893 by: Balazs NAGY
31894 by: Dave Sill
31895 by: jgordon.lhtech-inc.com
31905 by: Sam
Neat sendmail feature
31896 by: Dave Sill
31899 by: Racer X
31910 by: Russell Nelson
unsuscribe
31902 by: Ramunas M
31903 by: Ryan
31904 by: Russell Nelson
Dealing with the "unsuBscribe" word (was: unsuscribe)
31911 by: Magnus Bodin
31914 by: Russell Nelson
two questions....
31912 by: courtney.whtz.com
31913 by: Lyndon Griffin
31916 by: Tupshin Harper
Re: mail appliance
31915 by: Anand Buddhdev
looping messages
31918 by: Lidia Marchioni
qmail stopped, reason unknown
31919 by: James
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Hi,
I need to keep logs of qmail atleast for 60 days, but when I
check in /var/log/qmail it shows the logs of only past three-four days. I would
be very thankful if somebody can tell me how to increase the entry for no.
of days for which qmail keeps the logs.
Thanks,
|
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 03:58:09PM +0530, shajain wrote:
> Hi,
> I need to keep logs of qmail atleast for 60 days, but when I check in /var/log/qmail
>it shows the logs of only past three-four days. I would be very thankful if somebody
>can tell me how to increase the entry for no. of days for which qmail keeps the logs.
> Thanks,
There are different opinions whether it's best to do time-based or
size-based logging, but if you want time-based logging, go for cyclog and
Bruce Guenter patch for invoking a command when rotating.
Rename file to day-number, and do something intelligent with the oldies.
http://em.ca/~bruceg/rpms/daemontools/cyclog-command.patch
/magnus
--
MOST useless 1998 * http://x42.com/
"shajain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I need to keep logs of qmail atleast for 60 days, but when I check in
>/var/log/qmail it shows the logs of only past three-four days. I
>would be very thankful if somebody can tell me how to increase the
>entry for no. of days for which qmail keeps the logs.
Assuming you're using cyclog, the total size of the logs is determined
by two arguments: -s (the size of each file, default 104000) and -n
(the number of log files, default 10). So, by default, cyclog keeps
about a megabyte of logs. If you wanted 20 megabytes of logs, you
could do something like:
blah blah blah ... | cyclog -n20 -s1004000 /var/log/qmail
There's no way with cyclog to keep a specified duration of logs.
-Dave
If you use cyclog:
man cyclog (check the -n option)
supervise $DIR qmail-start "$DEFAULT_DELIVERY" accustamp qmail \
| setuser $LOGUSER cyclog -n 100 -s 1000000 /var/log/qmail &
would keep 100 logfiles, each 1Mb in the /var/log/qmail directory
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
IDG New Media Einar Bordewich
System Manager Phone: +47 2205 3034
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: shajain
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 12:28 PM
Subject: qmail logs
Hi,
I need to keep logs of qmail atleast for 60 days, but when I check in /var/log/qmail
it shows the logs of only past three-four days. I would be very thankful if somebody
can tell me how to increase the entry for no. of days for which qmail keeps the logs.
Thanks,
On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 11:44:10PM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Or to put it a different way, you want qmail to recognize and remember
> those hosts and when one of that host's connections closes, adjust the
> retry schedule for the next message bound for that host. However, the
> next message very likely will be retried in five minutes. So why go
> to all the bother of recognizing and remembering those hosts just to
> gain five minutes?
While I think you're right in principle there are situations where it
might be desirable:
- Mailing-Lists
In DE there is a very large ISP (telco). By default the usernames in
emails are the phone numbers of their customers. Some braindamaged
mailing list "tools" sort the addresslist, so these addresses get
clustered. A customer of ours is running a opt-in newsletter (and I
can't convince them to use a real ml software like ezmlm). The cluster
in this case is about 1500-2000 addresses and I often see emails (especially
in the [789]* ranges sit there for quite some time (1-2 hours). So
they have about 3-5 retries
- Fault situations
when the mail server of customers that have quite some mail traffic
is down for some time (we're backup MX for them) our queue has large
numbers of emails for them that are already in some backoff state.
If their mailserver comes back online rejection due to overload does
kinda hurt, as the message may be delayed for some more time not in
the minutes but hours range.
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Yeah, yo mama dresses
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | you funny and you need
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | a mouse to delete files
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 |
Markus Stumpf writes:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 11:44:10PM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote:
> > Or to put it a different way, you want qmail to recognize and remember
> > those hosts and when one of that host's connections closes, adjust the
> > retry schedule for the next message bound for that host. However, the
> > next message very likely will be retried in five minutes. So why go
> > to all the bother of recognizing and remembering those hosts just to
> > gain five minutes?
>
> While I think you're right in principle there are situations where it
> might be desirable:
> - Mailing-Lists
> - Fault situations
And in neither of those cases is it an improvement to keep banging on
the destination host. If it refuses messages, then by inference it's
overloaded. Much better to wait until it isn't.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 04:57:08PM -0400, John R. Levine wrote:
> >Or use serialmail. This limits the concurrency to one and you'll have
> >to trigger serialmail from time to time, but it is easier I think to
> >install serialmail for a few band-aided sites than to have qmail
> >installations multiplying.
>
> Actually, you can run multiple instances of serialmail out of the same
> maildir, so if you want up to four deliveries, do something like this
> in your trigger script
If I remember right, only one instance of maildirsmtp was supposed to
run on one Maildir at any one time, otherwise there could be
duplications. However, when I checked out the manpages of the current
serialmail (0.75), there is no such limitation mentioned. Let me do a
test...
I attempted delivery of 3 messages out of a maildir to a host, using 3
simultaneous instances of maildirsmtp running in the background, and each
message was delivered thrice. Additionally, the second and third
instances of maildirserial complained that they could not unlink
messages so and so, and that it would be delivered twice (this is
misleading, because the message file has indeed been unlinked, by
another maildirserial).
In the past, I have solved such a problem of a slow host, by first
collecting their email in 'n' maildirs (where n is the concurrency I
want), and then running one copy of maildirsmtp on each maildir.
DJB: Why did you remove that warning about simultaneous use of
maildirserial on a Maildir? The problem still exists.
--
See complete headers for more info
There's always an exception. For example, legacy systems with strange
(but conformant) IP stacks - some VMS systems for example. I would
love to be able to do set per-host concurrency for such systems where
I know *exactly* what the upper limit on concurrent connections it
can handle is, cause it's defined in it's IP / MTA implementation.
There's no point in going above this figure cause it just ties up my
remote connections due to the way it handles connections above this
number - i.e. it becomes a black hole.
-tony
On 20-Oct-99 Russell Nelson wrote:
> And in neither of those cases is it an improvement to keep banging
> on
> the destination host. If it refuses messages, then by inference
> it's
> overloaded. Much better to wait until it isn't.
>
---
E-Mail: Tony Gale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All new:
Parts not interchangeable with previous model.
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer
and do not represent the views, policy or understanding of
any other person or official body.
Matt Mouser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Hi,
: I was wondering how small could I get Qmail down in file size? I am only
: talking about the binaries and config files. All the user mail boxes and
: stuff won't be a problem. The reason I ask is because I run a different
: linux distro that stores all my os and daemons in a ramdisk. This is great.
: Right now everything boots off a floppy (exim and qpopper) and then loads in
: ram, and I have all my user files stored on hard drives. I wish to do the
: same thing with qmail. All the current packages I use are just tarred
: gzipped files. How small can I get qmail's binaries and config files down
: to? I would love to use Qmail as it has tons more vhosting features than
: other mailservers and is way more scaleable. Thanks for your help.
: Matt
You could install a qmail tarball on the ramdisk, copy it to real
disk after fsck, delete the tarball from ram, and run from normal
disk. I don't know if djb would approve of this "binary
distribution" though.
-harold
Hi All,
I've download a patch from Chris Johnson to control the envelope sender,
but I don't know how to apply it???
I would like to understand more about patchs and how to apply, create
one and how it works. Where can I find documentation?
I would like to apply other patch from "Frank DENIS aka Jedi/Sector One
aka DJ Chrysalis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" to truncate the mailer-daemon failure notice,
is it possible to apply 2 or 3 patches? Is there an order to apply them?
Best regards,
Ari
"Ari Arantes Filho" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've download a patch from Chris Johnson to control the envelope sender,
>but I don't know how to apply it???
Usually one uses the "patch" command.
> I would like to understand more about patchs and how to apply,
"man patch"
>create one
"man diff"
>and how it works. Where can I find documentation?
>
> I would like to apply other patch from "Frank DENIS aka Jedi/Sector One
>aka DJ Chrysalis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" to truncate the mailer-daemon failure notice,
>is it possible to apply 2 or 3 patches?
Sometimes. It's possible for patches to confict, e.g., both want to
change the same line to something different. Also, the "patch" command
can get confused when the file it's updating doesn't match the file
the diff was created from. In such cases, one can apply the diffs
manually.
>Is there an order to apply them?
Possibly.
-Dave
I'm upgrading from sendmail to qmail and now I have a big problem.
BEFORE instaling qmail:
fetchmail get all mail from a pop3. All these mail are sent to postmaster
and postmaster re-send the mail to the person which this mail belongs
AFTER instaling qmail:
fetchmail get all mail from a pop3. These mail are sent to postmaster, but
now, postmaster send all mail to ~alias/Maildir, because I have a file named
.qmail-postmaster in /var/qmail/alias directory.
What do I have to do to make all mail to postmaster to be sended to the
users, like it was with sendmail?
Please help me!
Daniel
****************
Daniel
****************
"Daniel Cukier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm upgrading from sendmail to qmail and now I have a big problem.
>
>BEFORE instaling qmail:
>fetchmail get all mail from a pop3. All these mail are sent to postmaster
>and postmaster re-send the mail to the person which this mail belongs
How did it do that? Sendmail doesn't work thay way "out of the box".
>What do I have to do to make all mail to postmaster to be sended to the
>users, like it was with sendmail?
How can postmaster tell which user a message is intended for?
-Dave
I've been thinking about setting up qmail, and I'll have the same problem.
I'm interested in what people have to say about this.
Dave Sill wrote:
> "Daniel Cukier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I'm upgrading from sendmail to qmail and now I have a big problem.
> >
> >BEFORE instaling qmail:
> >fetchmail get all mail from a pop3. All these mail are sent to postmaster
> >and postmaster re-send the mail to the person which this mail belongs
>
> How did it do that? Sendmail doesn't work thay way "out of the box".
Sure it does, at least in Red Hat 5.2.
>
> >What do I have to do to make all mail to postmaster to be sended to the
> >users, like it was with sendmail?
>
> How can postmaster tell which user a message is intended for?
I believe fetchmail just takes the userid off of the addresses when it gets
mail via pop3. Then it tries to send the mail to the local user with that
userid. I matched up my e-mail address userid to my local userid by throwing
an entry into the mail alias file in /usr/lib.
/\/\ike
--
Mike Taylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Alias|Wavefront, Toronto
http://reality.sgi.com/mtaylor
Michael Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Dave Sill wrote:
>
>> "Daniel Cukier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >I'm upgrading from sendmail to qmail and now I have a big problem.
>> >
>> >BEFORE instaling qmail:
>> >fetchmail get all mail from a pop3. All these mail are sent to postmaster
>> >and postmaster re-send the mail to the person which this mail belongs
>>
>> How did it do that? Sendmail doesn't work thay way "out of the box".
>
>Sure it does, at least in Red Hat 5.2.
Nope. Sendmail isn't redirecting postmaster mail; fetchmail is parsing
Received lines and redirecting the messages.
>> How can postmaster tell which user a message is intended for?
>
>I believe fetchmail just takes the userid off of the addresses when it gets
>mail via pop3. Then it tries to send the mail to the local user with that
>userid. I matched up my e-mail address userid to my local userid by throwing
>an entry into the mail alias file in /usr/lib.
If that's the case, you just need to set up aliases for the users
under qmail equivalent to the ones you set up under sendmail.
-Dave
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 01:52:33PM -0200, Daniel Cukier wrote:
> AFTER instaling qmail:
> fetchmail get all mail from a pop3. These mail are sent to postmaster, but
> now, postmaster send all mail to ~alias/Maildir, because I have a file named
> .qmail-postmaster in /var/qmail/alias directory.
How does your fetchmailrc look like? I have a multidrop-POP-box as well:
# Use this for production
set no bouncemail
poll mail.inka.de
protocol pop3
aka inka.de picard.inka.de
envelope ``Envelope-to:''
no dns:
user POP-User with pass POP-Pass is * here
forcecr
smtphost picard.inka.de
I guess two things are important here:
- first the user-line which tells fetchmail not to deliver exclusively to
POP-User
- then my ISP does provide the ``real'' recipient in an additional
``Envelope-to:''-line.
mostly I do not have problems receiving mail (though sometimes the
envelope-sender is set to [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
Regards
Mirko
--
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
privat: http://sites.inka.de/picard
commerce: http://www.webideal.de
qmail, ldap, serialfax, rh-isdn: http://www.webideal.de/#downloads
will someone take me off this thing. Every time I try to unsubscribe, it
tells me I'm not a member. I've tried every email address I have. It's
like talking to a computer :-)
(yes, I know I'm talking to a mailbot.)
sorry, I guess I need to eat lunch..............
begin:vcard
n:Santerre;Chris
tel;pager:(401)452-6449
tel;work:(401)453-4455 ext.109
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:www.paginc.com
org:Property Advisory Group
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:IT Manager
note:Study the history of Bill Gates, then you will want to buy Linux!
adr;quoted-printable:;;4 Cathedral Square =0D=0ASuite 1G=0D=0A;Providence;RI;02903;USA
fn:Chris
end:vcard
have the same problem!!!!!!
I tried to unsubscribe many times without success.
Regards,
Gianluca
BCNINEDITA
Aribau 70 3o 2a
08011 BARCELONA
Tel.934540099
Fax. 934541979
@@ ICQ 47323154 @@
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.bcninedita.com
| -----Mensaje original-----
| De: Chris Santerre [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Enviado el: miercoles 20 de octubre de 1999 18:09
| Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Asunto: this dam list
|
| will someone take me off this thing. Every time I try to unsubscribe, it
| tells me I'm not a member. I've tried every email address I have. It's
| like talking to a computer :-)
|
| (yes, I know I'm talking to a mailbot.)
|
| sorry, I guess I need to eat lunch..............
|
|
| <<Archivo: csanterre.vcf>>
Gianluca Baldo writes:
> have the same problem!!!!!!
> I tried to unsubscribe many times without success.
Did you follow the instructions?
When you sent mail to the list robot, where did you send it?
when you got a reply, what did it say?
Unfortunately, the stock ezmlm text does not give you the information
you need when you expect it, so save all the responses you get, and be
prepared to read all of them.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Gianluca Baldo wrote:
> have the same problem!!!!!!
> I tried to unsubscribe many times without success.
Mailing List Motel?
Subscribers check in, but they don't check out.
--
Albert Hopkins
Sr. Systems Specialist
Dynacare, Inc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For those of you who don't know, to
unsubscribe to this list (because this is an ezmlm
list)
all you have to do is send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] for help
[EMAIL PROTECTED] to subscribe
and finally......
[EMAIL PROTECTED] to unsubscribe
Note, that this information was sent to you
when you first subscribed on with this list.
Cheers,
JDG
--
Jeffrey D. Gordon
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Administrator/Development
Programmer
Lighthouse Technologies
http://www.lhtech-inc.com
Expressions of JDG viewed this list are
purly that of JDG and not or Lighthouse
Technologies
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For those of you who don't know, to
>unsubscribe to this list (because this is an ezmlm
>list)
>
>all you have to do is send a message to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] for help
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] to subscribe
>and finally......
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] to unsubscribe
>
> Note, that this information was sent to you
>when you first subscribed on with this list.
However, if your address has changed, and you're not sure which
address you subscribed under, you'll need to look at the Delivered-To
and/or Received fields of a message from the list, then plug the
correct address (e.g., [EMAIL PROTECTED]) into the following:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Dave
Does EZMLM support URN headers? That should allow you to unsubscribe
without any confusion... Also, if EZMLM had mail merge and a list
footer, then you can mail merge the delivery address in the footer of
every message.
That's what we do with our mailing list management product and customers
love it.
Nagendra
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dave Sill wrote:
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > For those of you who don't know, to
> >unsubscribe to this list (because this is an ezmlm
> >list)
> >
> >all you have to do is send a message to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] for help
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] to subscribe
> >and finally......
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] to unsubscribe
> >
> > Note, that this information was sent to you
> >when you first subscribed on with this list.
>
> However, if your address has changed, and you're not sure which
> address you subscribed under, you'll need to look at the Delivered-To
> and/or Received fields of a message from the list, then plug the
> correct address (e.g., [EMAIL PROTECTED]) into the following:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -Dave
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 04:04:53PM -0400, Nagendra Mishr wrote:
# Also, if EZMLM had mail merge and a list
# footer, then you can mail merge the delivery address in the footer of
# every message.
it would also create many thousands of more email messages, instead of one
message for many it would need to generate a message for each memeber of a
list.
At 03:08 PM 10/20/99 , Justin Bell wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 04:04:53PM -0400, Nagendra Mishr wrote:
># Also, if EZMLM had mail merge and a list
># footer, then you can mail merge the delivery address in the footer of
># every message.
>
>it would also create many thousands of more email messages, instead of one
>message for many it would need to generate a message for each memeber of a
>list.
This happens anyways... That's how VERP works. Look at the
Return-Path: header of any email you get from this list...
-Dustin
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 05:36:05PM -0500, Dustin Marquess wrote:
# At 03:08 PM 10/20/99 , Justin Bell wrote:
# >On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 04:04:53PM -0400, Nagendra Mishr wrote:
# ># Also, if EZMLM had mail merge and a list
# ># footer, then you can mail merge the delivery address in the footer of
# ># every message.
# >
# >it would also create many thousands of more email messages, instead of one
# >message for many it would need to generate a message for each memeber of a
# >list.
#
# This happens anyways... That's how VERP works. Look at the
# Return-Path: header of any email you get from this list...
I guess I should have been more specific, it creates onemessage in the mail
queue, instead of hundreds or thousands.
--
/- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\
|Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. |
|Pearson | Attention span is quickening. |
|Developer | Welcome to the Information Age. |
\-------- http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ ----------/
Hi people,
I'm kinda desperate now, sitting here trying to make a couple of
mailaliases work. The names are full names, like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and they just don't want to work. I've traced the problem to the dot, since
[EMAIL PROTECTED] works and [EMAIL PROTECTED] works. And since lots of
companies uses "." in their names, I just can't believe that qmail don't
support it.
And somehow the domain foo.com just stop working when I've tried
marthe.gangflot. So I can try to use any name that worked before (like
marthe) and it won't work now :-(
foo.com is a virtualhost where user foo takes care of all the mails for
this domain.
Thanks,
--
-Marthe
Ano-Tech Computers, www.atc.no
"You humans are a disease, a cancer to this planet..
You are a plague.. and we.. are the cure."
On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Marthe Nesřen Gangflřt wrote:
> I'm kinda desperate now, sitting here trying to make a couple of
> mailaliases work. The names are full names, like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and they just don't want to work. I've traced the problem to the dot, since
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] works and [EMAIL PROTECTED] works. And since lots of
> companies uses "." in their names, I just can't believe that qmail don't
> support it.
Use : in .qmail-..., but check dot-qmail(5) too.
Anyway, is this the FAQ day?
--
Regards: Kevin (Balazs) @ synergon
[Marthe Nes�en Gangfl�t <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:]
> Hi people,
> I'm kinda desperate now, sitting here trying to make a couple of
> mailaliases work. The names are full names, like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and they just don't want to work. I've traced the problem to the dot, since
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] works and [EMAIL PROTECTED] works. And since lots of
> companies uses "." in their names, I just can't believe that qmail don't
> support it.
Of course it supports it.
From dot-qmail:
WARNING: For security, qmail-local replaces any dots in ext with
colons before checking .qmail-ext. For convenience, qmail-local
converts any uppercase letters in ext to lowercase.
That means marte.gangflot is controlled by .qmail-marte:gangflot.
--
Thorkild
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 08:30:08PM +0200, Marthe Nes�en Gangfl�t wrote:
> Hi people,
>
> I'm kinda desperate now, sitting here trying to make a couple of
> mailaliases work. The names are full names, like [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and they just don't want to work. I've traced the problem to the dot, since
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] works and [EMAIL PROTECTED] works. And since lots of
> companies uses "." in their names, I just can't believe that qmail don't
> support it.
It does. `man dot-qmail`.
Or, if you prefer,
<http://Web.InfoAve.Net/~dsill/lwq.html#dots-in-extensions>
/pg
--
Peter Green
Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 20:35 20.10.99 +0200, you wrote:
>Of course it supports it.
Of course it does :-/
> From dot-qmail:
>
>WARNING: For security, qmail-local replaces any dots in ext with
>colons before checking .qmail-ext. For convenience, qmail-local
>converts any uppercase letters in ext to lowercase.
>
>That means marte.gangflot is controlled by .qmail-marte:gangflot.
Well, really I appreciate all the answers even though each new mail made me
blush even more ;-/ I've read this, and I've seen it on this mailinglist if
I'm not mistaken, but I still didn't think of it now. But I know now that
even though I've read the FAQ before, I will do so again, every time I'm in
trouble. Thanks all :-)
--
-Marthe
Ano-Tech Computers, www.atc.no
"You humans are a disease, a cancer to this planet..
You are a plague.. and we.. are the cure."
I have configures the Qmail server (version 1.03/Solaris) to use tcpserver
and I have used the following command:
/opt/ucspi-tcp-0.84/bin/tcpserver -v -u5001 -g5001 -c500 -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb
0 smtp /opt/ucspi-tcp-0.84/bin/recordio /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd 2>&1 |
/var/qmail/bin/splogger smtpd 3 &
I am sending 5000 messages at it at a rate of ~50 messages a second. I have
set the localconcurrency to 100. The problem is that my client is losing
connections, almost out of the gate. The client tries to connect to the
qmail-smtpd and waits 20 seconds and is failing about 15% of the time. I
understand that the SMTP spec calls for the sending server to retry again in
a moment and then spread the time out as it continues to fail. However, I
am just wondering why the server cannot handle the connections given the
fact that I am telling the tcpserver to spawn away as needed.
Thanks,
David
On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Dave Sill wrote:
> However, if your address has changed, and you're not sure which
> address you subscribed under, you'll need to look at the Delivered-To
> and/or Received fields of a message from the list, then plug the
> correct address (e.g., [EMAIL PROTECTED]) into the following:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please tell me which address I specified when I subscribed. Here's your
mail's (the mailing list's one) header (just the significant first two
screens):
Return-Path: <>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 3187 invoked from network); 20 Oct 1999 17:59:24 -0000
Received: from sun.synergon.hu (172.23.130.1)
by zweiblumen.sun.synergon.hu with SMTP; 20 Oct 1999 17:59:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 18119 invoked by uid 113); 20 Oct 1999 17:59:22 -0000
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 18110 invoked from network); 20 Oct 1999 17:59:22 -0000
Received: from optont.synergon.hu (172.23.1.33)
by sun.synergon.hu with SMTP; 20 Oct 1999 17:59:22 -0000
Received: by optont.synergon.hu with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.10)
id <VCSB42R0>; Wed, 20 Oct 1999 19:57:27 +0200
Received: from cache1.synergon.hu ([194.149.60.26]) by optont.synergon.hu
with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.10)
id VCSB42R9; Wed, 20 Oct 1999 19:57:18 +0200
Received: (qmail 27828 invoked from network); 20 Oct 1999 17:58:57 -0000
Received: from grumpy.math.uic.edu (HELO muncher.math.uic.edu)
(131.193.178.181) by cache1.synergon.hu with SMTP; 20 Oct 1999 17:58:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 24048 invoked by uid 1002); 20 Oct 1999 17:56:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 17524 invoked from network); 20 Oct 1999 17:56:44 -0000
Received: from sws5.ctd.ornl.gov (128.219.128.125)
by muncher.math.uic.edu with SMTP; 20 Oct 1999 17:56:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 739434 invoked by uid 3995); 20 Oct 1999 17:58:46 -0000
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As you see, this mail did the long way.
Bonus question: which email address I used when I wrote this mail?
--
Regards: Kevin (Balazs) @ synergon
Balazs NAGY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Dave Sill wrote:
>
>> However, if your address has changed, and you're not sure which
>> address you subscribed under, you'll need to look at the Delivered-To
>> and/or Received fields of a message from the list, then plug the
>> correct address (e.g., [EMAIL PROTECTED]) into the following:
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Please tell me which address I specified when I subscribed. Here's your
>mail's (the mailing list's one) header (just the significant first two
>screens):
>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That's it.
>Bonus question: which email address I used when I wrote this mail?
What do you mean? The From field? The envelope return path? The From
is obvious. The envelope return path is lost when the message is
resent by ezmlm.
The copy you sent me directly had a return path of
[EMAIL PROTECTED], but that's cheating.
-Dave
Try it with both in seperate messages.
Process of elimination.
It doesn't hurt to try with ezmlm, it's rock
solid.
JDG
----- Original Message -----
From: Balazs NAGY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, 20 October, 1999 1:59 PM
Subject: Header Skelter (was: Re: this dam(N)(ED)
list)
| On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Dave Sill wrote:
|
| > However, if your address has changed, and
you're not sure which
| > address you subscribed under, you'll need to
look at the Delivered-To
| > and/or Received fields of a message from the
list, then plug the
| > correct address (e.g., [EMAIL PROTECTED]) into
the following:
| >
| >
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| Please tell me which address I specified when I
subscribed. Here's your
| mail's (the mailing list's one) header (just the
significant first two
| screens):
|
| Return-Path: <>
| Delivered-To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Received: (qmail 3187 invoked from network); 20
Oct 1999 17:59:24 -0000
| Received: from sun.synergon.hu (172.23.130.1)
| by zweiblumen.sun.synergon.hu with SMTP; 20
Oct 1999 17:59:24 -0000
| Received: (qmail 18119 invoked by uid 113); 20
Oct 1999 17:59:22 -0000
| Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Received: (qmail 18110 invoked from network); 20
Oct 1999 17:59:22 -0000
| Received: from optont.synergon.hu (172.23.1.33)
| by sun.synergon.hu with SMTP; 20 Oct 1999
17:59:22 -0000
| Received: by optont.synergon.hu with Internet
Mail Service (5.5.2650.10)
| id <VCSB42R0>; Wed, 20 Oct 1999 19:57:27
+0200
| Received: from cache1.synergon.hu
([194.149.60.26]) by optont.synergon.hu
| with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail
Service Version 5.5.2650.10)
| id VCSB42R9; Wed, 20 Oct 1999 19:57:18
+0200
| Received: (qmail 27828 invoked from network); 20
Oct 1999 17:58:57 -0000
| Received: from grumpy.math.uic.edu (HELO
muncher.math.uic.edu)
| (131.193.178.181) by cache1.synergon.hu with
SMTP; 20 Oct 1999 17:58:57 -0000
| Received: (qmail 24048 invoked by uid 1002); 20
Oct 1999 17:56:44 -0000
| Received: (qmail 17524 invoked from network); 20
Oct 1999 17:56:44 -0000
| Received: from sws5.ctd.ornl.gov
(128.219.128.125)
| by muncher.math.uic.edu with SMTP; 20 Oct 1999
17:56:44 -0000
| Received: (qmail 739434 invoked by uid 3995); 20
Oct 1999 17:58:46 -0000
| Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED];
run by ezmlm
| Precedence: bulk
| Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| As you see, this mail did the long way.
|
| Bonus question: which email address I used when
I wrote this mail?
| --
| Regards: Kevin (Balazs) @ synergon
|
|
On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Balazs NAGY wrote:
> Please tell me which address I specified when I subscribed. Here's your
> mail's (the mailing list's one) header (just the significant first two
> screens):
[ snip ]
> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Sam
>From Eric Allman's interview on sendmail.net:
>Are there features in sendmail that people should be aware of but
>aren't?
>
>Oh, there are probably dozens of them. One that comes to mind, a very
>simple one, is the fallback MX option, which lets you redirect mail
>that has failed the first time to another location. It essentially
>acts as a lowest possible priority MX record for all hosts. For
>example, if you've got a mail system that's got a lot of traffic
>going through it, you have another machine that you dedicate to the
>slow mail, the stuff that didn't go through the first time, where
>presumably you're less concerned about how quickly it goes because
>the other end's being slow. So you set your initial connection
>timeout to something low - five seconds, ten seconds, whatever's
>right for your site - and you set the fallback MX on your main site
>to this fallback host. That way the mail that's going to go through
>quickly just goes fsssssssst right through your main server, while
>the stuff that's going to be slow (because the other end is either
>slow to connect or down) goes off to this other machine and doesn't
>clog up the main machine. It turns out to be just an amazing win. And
>these days the price of a PC box running FreeBSD or Linux is close
>enough to zero that it might as well be zero, so it's not really a
>problem to do it
Any thoughts about how to do this with qmail? Or reasons why it's a
bad idea?
-Dave
> >to this fallback host. That way the mail that's going to go through
> >quickly just goes fsssssssst right through your main server, while
> >the stuff that's going to be slow (because the other end is either
> >slow to connect or down) goes off to this other machine and doesn't
> >clog up the main machine. It turns out to be just an amazing win. And
>
> Any thoughts about how to do this with qmail? Or reasons why it's a
> bad idea?
seems like more trouble than it's worth. if you run sendmail then perhaps
"clogging up the main server" becomes more of an issue. but on my linux box
each qmail-remote process is only taking up about 400k of resident memory,
of which 300k is shared. i'd run out of network pipe long before i started
to slow down the main machine.
there might be some differences at the extremes, for instance if you tried
to run 1000 qmail-remotes simultaneously you'd probably torch the scheduler.
but that's more of a unix problem than a qmail problem.
my solution would be to put multiple machines behind a layer 4 load
balancing switch and inject mail via that mechanism, or if that switch is
too much, change up your injection mechanism to load balance. allman
suggests that this is a general purpose way to offload "slow" mail, but it
looks more useful to me in massive injection situations where a whole bunch
of mail gets queued at once. at steady state i don't think it will make a
difference.
shag
Dave Sill writes that Eric Allman says:
> >That way the mail that's going to go through quickly just goes
> >fsssssssst right through your main server, while the stuff that's
> >going to be slow (because the other end is either slow to connect
> >or down) goes off to this other machine and doesn't clog up the
> >main machine.
Is sendmail running out of machine resources to retry mail? Or is it
simply incapable of sending email quickly with a large queue? This is
probably an "amazing win" because of the scaling problems that come
free with every copy of sendmail.
If you're not hitting your concurrencyremote, this is a complete
nonissue for you. If it is, and you have jacked up your
concurrencyremote, and you're still hitting concurrencyremote and your
machine still has spare resources, then install another copy of qmail,
and write a wrapper which execs one of the qmail-queues depending on
some criteria. Scale up the number of copies until you run out of
machine resources. Or else install Johannes Erdfelt's big-concurrency
patch.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Ryan writes:
>
Personally, on my mailing lists, unsuscribe is a four-letter word. If
you send mail with that word anywhere, the mail gets forwarded to
LIST-unsubscribe@HOST.
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 05:49:45PM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Ryan writes:
> >
> Personally, on my mailing lists, unsuscribe is a four-letter word. If
> you send mail with that word anywhere, the mail gets forwarded to
> LIST-unsubscribe@HOST.
OK, but is it permissible to write unsuBscribe? ;-)
This is better than nothing. But automatic censoring is almost never vert
good. I would rather WARN the user automatically instead of posting,
then accepting it if he persists with the same text, or enclosed in
quotation-marks, or whatever.
Cause, you may want to use the word in some really different context.
And four-letter words could be used in other contexts too.
--
magnus
-- MOST useless 1998 * http://x42.com/
Magnus Bodin writes:
> OK, but is it permissible to write unsuBscribe? ;-)
Nope. And case doesn't matter either. It only causes a problem when
someone says "GET ME THE HELL OFF THIS DAMNED LIST", and I have to try
to explain how they send mail to qmail-uns*bscr*be. :)
--
-russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | can outdo them. Homeschool!
Hey everyone,
I've got two more questions for everyone-
1.) I want to write a pearl script to use as the back-end of a web page
form, now normally I would reference the location of sendmail (eg.
"/usr/lib/sendmail -t") but now that I'm running Qmail, what should I do to
get this script to enable it to send outgoing e-mail??
2.) I am getting a message that prints on the screen of my FreeBSD based
Qmail box saying something about a problem with the SMTPD something along
the line of a loop or something...ring any bells with anyone?? I am not in
front of the box so I can't quote the exact message, but I figure that
someone on here must have seen it before...what is it? why am I getting
it? how can I make it go away? :-))
thanks in advance,
Bernie Courtney
Z100 New York Radio Engineering
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I've got two more questions for everyone-
>
> 1.) I want to write a pearl script to use as the back-end of a web page
> form, now normally I would reference the location of sendmail (eg.
> "/usr/lib/sendmail -t") but now that I'm running Qmail, what should I do to
> get this script to enable it to send outgoing e-mail??
try:
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-inject -h
I'll answer just question 1 since that's my forte.
use the Mail::Sendmail module instead. It's much more portable than calling any
platform specific binary.
http://www.cpan.org/modules/by-category/19_Mail_and_Usenet_News/Mail/Mail-Sendmail-0.77.readme
-Tupshin Harper
-Developer
-Studio Verso
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 9:08 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: two questions....
>
>
>
>
> Hey everyone,
>
> I've got two more questions for everyone-
>
> 1.) I want to write a pearl script to use as the back-end of a web page
> form, now normally I would reference the location of sendmail (eg.
> "/usr/lib/sendmail -t") but now that I'm running Qmail, what should I do to
> get this script to enable it to send outgoing e-mail??
>
> 2.) I am getting a message that prints on the screen of my FreeBSD based
> Qmail box saying something about a problem with the SMTPD something along
> the line of a loop or something...ring any bells with anyone?? I am not in
> front of the box so I can't quote the exact message, but I figure that
> someone on here must have seen it before...what is it? why am I getting
> it? how can I make it go away? :-))
>
>
> thanks in advance,
> Bernie Courtney
> Z100 New York Radio Engineering
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 02:47:55PM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote:
> James Smallacombe writes:
> >
> > Didn't I hear that someone put together a webmin module for qmail?
> > Anybody know anything about it?
>
> <li>Vyacheslav Ignatyuk wrote an alpha version of a <a
> href="ftp://ftp.ant.ru/pub/qmail/qmail-manager.tar.gz">qmail
> manager module</a> for <a
> href="http://www.webmin.com">webmin</a>. It's a first alpha version,
> so may be unstable.
I tried this, and it has a bug in it, which causes incorrect updates of
the virtualdomains file. It's easily fixed though. Since I had no
contact for the author, I didn't pursue the matter any further. There
may be other bugs which I'm not aware of.
--
See complete headers for more info
This is becoming a long story and the longer the uglier...
We have qmail crossposting with dnews (news server). Three messages
went into a loop today. I stopped qmail and removed everything from
queue (/var/qmail/queue/mess). A while later I saw the same messages
coming back. I checked the news server's .send file and sure enough,
there were multiple entries for messages we have already received.
Removed the entries.
I am watching closely /var/qmail/queue/mess and noticed that as the new
messages are coming in, some of them are duplicated. One copy is stored
in e.g. folder 10 the other in 9... What could be the reason for this?
Restarting qmail does not seem to fix the problem. What can I check?
I don't really see any error messages other than:
20 13:45:04: DATA body: Expecting 250, got 451 timeout (#4.4.2)^M
in the news server's log file, when it tries to send the messages to
qmail.
I tried to get rid of the multiple messages by removing them from
/var/qmail/queue/mess and /var/qmail/queue/todo and
/var/qmail/queue/intd but the same id's keep coming back. Where are
they being picked up from?
thanks
Lidia
Where can I find error logs that might help me figure out why qmail
stopped working today at around 11:00? I have checked the /var/log/qmail
and went through the various files there, but none seem to help me find
out why I suddenly can't send or receive email. I have been using qmail
successfully for many months, I even had virtual mail working fine, and I
cannot for the life of me figure out why qmail isn't working any longer.
I didn't touch any qmail files today when it stopped working, there were
even a couple of successful emails sent to me today.. now I can't send OR
receive. I am using Mandrake 6.0
Thanks for any suggestions.
James
