qmail Digest 5 Mar 2001 11:00:01 -0000 Issue 1294
Topics (messages 58366 through 58400):
Re: relaying
58366 by: Peter van Dijk
58367 by: Alexander Jernejcic
58380 by: David Dyer-Bennet
Re: qmail 2.0 exploit
58368 by: skyper
58369 by: Peter van Dijk
58375 by: Charles Cazabon
Qmail and time zone
58370 by: Kari Suomela
58371 by: Chris Johnson
58373 by: Mark Delany
58381 by: Stefaan A Eeckels
58382 by: Rod... Whitworth
Re: Qmail-Fetchmail: delivered-to
58372 by: Martin Sch�ler
58376 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: Benchmarking qmail -- opinions, please
58374 by: Charles Cazabon
Re: trigger with wrong permission.
58377 by: James R Grinter
Re: mbox POP3 Server w/Virtual Domain Support
58378 by: James R Grinter
Re: My mail is lost!!
58379 by: David Dyer-Bennet
patch: mess822-stricthome
58383 by: Paul Jarc
Extracting attachments from emails.
58384 by: Grant
58385 by: Rodent of Unusual Size
Re: New qmail version request
58386 by: Scott Gifford
58387 by: Scott Gifford
58395 by: Fredrik Steen
58396 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
58398 by: Fredrik Steen
Re: uucp server and qmail
58388 by: Ian Lance Taylor
Re: Return-Path
58389 by: Keary Suska
QMTP/mail distribution
58390 by: Daniel Kelley
58391 by: Chris Johnson
58392 by: Peter van Dijk
cant recive mails
58393 by: Mike A. Sauvain
58394 by: Greg White
Vqregister
58397 by: meric.starcom.co.ug
how to unsubscribe?
58399 by: weiyf
qmail pop3 authentication logging
58400 by: Eduard
Administrivia:
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To bug my human owner, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 02:03:21PM -0800, Rohit Gupta wrote:
> Hello all Gurus
> I wish to relay to all hosts...
> i am already authenticating users from tcpserver but is there any way that i dont
>have to specify hosts , for which i can act as a relay , in the RCPTHOSTS file but
>simpy relay for ALL
Remove the rcpthosts file.
Are you sure this is what you want?
Greetz, Peter.
Hi,
Rohit Gupta wrote:
...snip...
> I wish to relay to all hosts...
...snip...
if this is not an internal only mailserver you are likely to run into big
troubles
:) alexander
"Rohit Gupta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wish to relay to all hosts...
Soon, you will feel differently. Either you'll think better of this
before you implementit, or else you will go ahead and implement it, be
found by spammers, get 10 million bounce messages, and get added to
ORBS, the RSS, and maybe the RBL. I suggest the first course -- pay
attention to the other messages already posted in this thread, and
don't do it.
--
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 07:14:59PM +1100, Brett Randall wrote:
> On 02 Mar 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Dan could fix this by releasing qmail-1.03.1 with different
> > installation instructions. Of course, if he did, some people would
> > take that to be an admission that there actually is a security hole in
> > qmail-1.03.
>
> Who cares what other people think? If he (Dan) is giving out a
> product which is even better and easier to set up than his last
> version, then who cares about the reasons? What are we doing?
> Making software design a sentimental practice?
hi.
im new to the list...just read the topic.
someone gimme infos about this exploit.
which part of the source is vulnerable ?
which file ? line ?
any fix ?
who is working on an exploit ?
skyper
--
PGP: dig @segfault.net skyper axfr|grep TX|cut -f2 -d\"|sort|cut -f2 -d\;
On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 12:48:01PM +0000, skyper wrote:
[snip]
>
> hi.
> im new to the list...just read the topic.
> someone gimme infos about this exploit.
There is no exploit.
> which part of the source is vulnerable ?
None.
> which file ? line ?
None. None.
> any fix ?
None necessary.
> who is working on an exploit ?
Nobody.
Greetz, Peter.
skyper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> im new to the list...just read the topic.
Not well enough, evidently.
> someone gimme infos about this exploit.
There isn't one. It was a hypothetical argument.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday March 04 2001 05:36, Mark Delany wrote to Kari Suomela:
MD> As others have said, qmail only puts a Date: header in if one
MD> isn't
MD> already present,
That's probably what it should be doing, except it's not doing it
right. The Date header should include the TZ, i.e. GMT offset.
KS
KARICO Business Services
Toronto, ON Canada
http://www.ksbase.com
... Among economists, the real world is often a special case.
On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 09:43:28AM -0500, Kari Suomela wrote:
>
> MD> As others have said, qmail only puts a Date: header in if one
> MD> isn't
> MD> already present,
>
> That's probably what it should be doing, except it's not doing it
> right. The Date header should include the TZ, i.e. GMT offset.
Why do you keep saying this? Where does it say that the Date header should be
in your local time zone? Why would it be better if it were?
Chris
PGP signature
On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 09:43:28AM -0500, Kari Suomela wrote:
>
> Sunday March 04 2001 05:36, Mark Delany wrote to Kari Suomela:
>
>
> MD> As others have said, qmail only puts a Date: header in if one
> MD> isn't
> MD> already present,
>
> That's probably what it should be doing, except it's not doing it
> right.
According to which particular standard?
> The Date header should include the TZ, i.e. GMT offset.
According to which particular standard?
Btw. Personal preference does not count as a standard.
Regards.
>From Kari's header:
> Received: (qmail 1259 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2001 05:15:11 -0000
> Received: from kb2.ksbase.com (HELO k4.ksbase.com) (216.126.66.211) by
> kb3.ksbase.com with SMTP; 4 Mar 2001 05:15:11 -0000
> Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2001 23:28:30 -0500
> I am not talking about clients! Mail generated on a qmail server
> doesn't have proper date headers, whereas mail coming from a sendmail
> server does.
and
> That's probably what it should be doing, except it's not doing it
> right. The Date header should include the TZ, i.e. GMT offset.
Meseems you've got a perfectly reasonable Date: line...
As a matter of fact, all your messages have a -0500 offset in the
Date: line. What are you blathering about?
Stefaan
--
How's it supposed to get the respect of management if you've got just
one guy working on the project? It's much more impressive to have a
battery of programmers slaving away. -- Jeffrey Hobbs (comp.lang.tcl)
On Sun, 04 Mar 2001 22:44:45 +0100 (MET), Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
>From Kari's header:
>
>> Received: (qmail 1259 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2001 05:15:11 -0000
>> Received: from kb2.ksbase.com (HELO k4.ksbase.com) (216.126.66.211) by
>> kb3.ksbase.com with SMTP; 4 Mar 2001 05:15:11 -0000
>> Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2001 23:28:30 -0500
>
>
>> I am not talking about clients! Mail generated on a qmail server
>> doesn't have proper date headers, whereas mail coming from a sendmail
>> server does.
>
>and
>
>> That's probably what it should be doing, except it's not doing it
>> right. The Date header should include the TZ, i.e. GMT offset.
>
>
>Meseems you've got a perfectly reasonable Date: line...
>As a matter of fact, all your messages have a -0500 offset in the
>Date: line. What are you blathering about?
Stefaan, the line that worries me in that snip you quoted was the one
containing -0000. A negative GMT or UTC or whatever you call it means
that there is a difficulty with the timezone on the local machine (IIRC
RFC822) and due to an error in RFC822 definition of Military TZ codes
(reversed offset from UTC) RFC1123 suggests the use of -0000 should be
substituted for all Mil TZs.
Does this have any bearing on his problem? I don't know as I have not
been following it in detail. The -0000 just hit my eye.
FWIW
In the beginning was The Word
and The Word was Content-type: text/plain
The Word of Rod.
>> [...] new msg 232614
>> [...] info msg 232614: bytes 956 from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> qp 1873 uid 0
>> [...] end msg 232614
>>
>>
>> Postmaster gets no mail first time. Well, no one gets them. This is new.
>> qmail-inject now eats them.
> Yes, fetchmail can lose your mail if everything is not configured
> perfectly. Might I suggest my own "getmail", which will not? See my
> .sig for a link. It doesn't do delivery by SMTP injection, which is a
> broken design.
I already had checked getmail. But it was not suitable, since I need QMail's
mail delivery.
In the meantime I know why the mails were "eaten". I forgot about using
mails having only "From:" and "Date:" fields, to avoid broken "To:"
behaviour.
qmail-inject does not know to whom to send the mail if it can not extract
the recipient from the header.
Martin
Martin Schüler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> qmail-inject does not know to whom to send the mail if it can not extract
> the recipient from the header.
Read the manual page for qmail-inject. The -a option will let you specify
exactly which recipients to send the message to, regardless of the
headers.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I've been trying to prove this -- I'm in the early stages of benchmarking
> > this, but queue injection at least seems to agree with this; I see either
> > no performance change or a small performance drop as conf-split increases
> > from 1 to various values during queue injection.
>
> Try it again with a queue of 10,000 messages.
I will. I plan on running through a large queue with various values of
conf-split, plus with and without large-todo (and perhaps large-concurrency
when measuring delivery speed instead of injection speed).
But it'll take a little while.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> skyper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > hu ? You mean allowing any local user to cat /dev/zero >trigger
> > is the better idea ? Giving non-trusted processes write access
> > to a pipe of a daemon (running with root-privilieges) is never
> > a good idea tought.
>
> That's the way it's designed. The author put a lot of thought into this,
> and there has never been a security hole in qmail. Look at the code
> yourself; it's safe.
Not to mention that the permissions on the directory
/var/qmail/queue/lock (and /var/qmail/queue) prevent anyone not in the
qmail group from accessing it anyway.
(Students of Unix variations will also know that Solaris and some
other OSs don't correctly enforce permissions on the named pipe itself
anyway.)
James.
Ben Schumacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> mbox server and virtual domains. Basically I need to be able to allow my
> users to have both shell and POP3 access to their mail, and since they
> will be using clients such as Pine, elm and others, I'm going to need to
> support the mbox format.
You could just make all clients talk through POP3 or IMAP.
(That might discount Elm, but I wouldn't consider that a great loss)
James.
Peter Cavender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Ok, After I had all the problems resovled ... from installation to the
>configuration!!
> > I am now able to do the following:
> > 1) login and use qmail as my SMTP / POP server:
> > that is , when I use outlook or pine for example, to check for e-mails on qmail
>server, I got no errors reported at all.
> >
> > but when I use it to send e-mails, they do not arrive.
> > when I send e-mails to it i.e. to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] no problems reported and
>the message does not seem to be there!!
> >
> > Can someone help me in this matter!! I think I am pretty close to this..
> > Thanks.
>
> qmail by default does not relay any mail.
What's "default"? control/rcpthosts present but empty? If it's
absent, then qmail does relay. Not, I think, a good choice, but so it
goes.
--
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/
Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
<URL:http://multivac.cwru.edu/qmail/>
The mess822-stricthome patch makes mess822 use conf-home for all
absolute filenames. This includes etc/leapsecs.dat. This is useful
for installing mess822 into its own directory (as in a slashpackage
system), for installation as a non-root user, or for easy inspection,
removal, etc., of the entire package; the package is entirely
contained in that directory, except perhaps for symlinks you set up
pointing to other locations. With this patch, mess822 can be
controlled independently of other packages on the system, or, if
uniformity is desired, symlinks to central /etc files can be created.
Note Mail-Followup-To; I'm not on the list at the moment.
paul
I am planning on sending backups of databases via automatic emails. Is it
possible to automatically extract attachments from all emails to a
certain address using some script and then unzipping the attachments
or something along those lines?
I know it's possible, I guess I'm asking for a solution to the problem :)
Thanks.
Grant wrote:
>
> Is it possible to automatically extract attachments from all
> emails to a certain address using some script and then
> unzipping the attachments or something along those lines?
Yep. I do something slong those lines in my autoresponder
package. See <URL:http://MeepZor.Com/packages/autoresponder/>.
Perl, of course.
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar <http://Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Software Foundation <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Apache-Server.Com/>
"Apache Server Unleashed" <http://ApacheUnleashed.Com/>
ApacheCon 2001!
Four tracks with over 70+ sessions. Free admission to exhibits
and special events - keynote presentations by John 'maddog' Hall
and David Brin. Special thanks to our Platinum Sponsors IBM and
Covalent, Gold Sponsor Thawte, and Silver Sponsor Compaq. Attend
only Apache event designed and fully supported by the members of
the ASF. See more information and register at <http://ApacheCon.Com/>!
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Chris Garrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Much of the common patches that are around fail in one of the tests above,
> > > at least when using the author's stringent tests. There's nothing wrong
> > > with this; he keeps qmail secure, reliable, efficient, and "correct", and
> > > anyone who wants to applies patches as they see fit.
> >
> > I, for one, am hoping that 2.0 will have LDAP support which meets his
> > standards.
>
> As you said, the existing LDAP libraries are probably crap. But why does
> qmail have to be patched to use LDAP? Why not use a script which extracts
> user information from the LDAP database, puts it in passwd format, and
> feeds it to qmail-pw2u? Then cron it every hour or something. Voila,
> instant qmail+LDAP with no patches. If you want to set it up with
> virtualdomains-type use, have the script output qmail-users style output
> directly.
In many environments (including ours), it's not acceptable to wait an
hour or more (it takes our LDAP server about 2.5 hours to dump our 3
million user accounts into a text file, so significantly more) for a
password change or a change to mail aliases to go through. Especially
if you have users changing their own forwarding, who need to be able
to test the changes. If they're waiting 2 hours for updates to take
effect and are typo-prone, playing it by ear, or making changes for
the first time, it could easily take an entire work day to get a mail
forward or vacation right.
This approach is also pretty hard on an LDAP server. Just to make a
rough estimate, in an average hour, about 10% of our users check their
mail, and about 10% receive messages, so you need to look at 20% of
the entries in LDAP. If you dump it out, you need to look at 100% of
the entries, so it's requires 5 times more power.
While building a passwd-like file might work in some environments, it
certainly doesn't work for everybody. That's why qmail-ldap exists,
and is gaining popularity.
------ScottG.
Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> LDAP is not part of an MTA. It's an extension.
LDAP may not be part of an MTA (although it certainly can be, if it
contains aliases), but it's a quite reasonable part of an MDA, which
qmail also includes in qmail-local. It's certainly as reasonable a
place to store account information as /etc/passwd, which qmail
supports without an extension.
While LDAP support may or may not be appropriate for the primary qmail
distribution, it's not so wildly inappropriate as to warrant a
two-sentence dismissal. :-)
------ScottG.
On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 11:00:19PM +0100, Peter van Dijk wrote:
| On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 12:20:37PM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
| > "Edward J. Allen III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > > There is nothing wrong with incorporating common patches into the
| > > distribution. This is how open source development works.
| >
| > qmail is not open source. It does not obey condition 3 of the Open
| > Source Definition:
| > http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.html
|
| Open Source is something else than open source.
|
| qmail is open source.
|
| qmail is not Open Source.
|
| Please do not respond, this subject has been discussed over and over.
|
| Greetz, Peter.
|
Peter this is your second mail in this thread telling
other to "Please stop this thread"..
If something has been discussed before on the list why can't we discuss it again?
--
.Fredrik Steen
- http://www.stone.nu -
PGP signature
> If something has been discussed before on the list why can't
> we discuss it again?
Because it wastes peoples time. Look at the archives if you are
interested.
Frank
On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 09:14:51AM +0100, Frank Tegtmeyer wrote:
| > If something has been discussed before on the list why can't
| > we discuss it again?
|
| Because it wastes peoples time. Look at the archives if you are
| interested.
|
| Frank
|
What if you want to take part of the discussion and missed it?
IMHO:
I don't like posts like "Please stop this thread",
and posts like "Because it wastes peoples time".
One don't have to read them, one don't need to participate.
Then it won't waste one's time..
--
.Fredrik Steen
- http://www.stone.nu -
PGP signature
Yee Siew Chin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> how can i configure a qmail to act as a uucp server?
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/outgoing.html#uucp
Ian
call qmail-inject with the -f option or specify the return path in the
headers:
Return-Path: <user@host>
-K
> From: "Jon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2001 10:57:50 -0000
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Return-Path
>
> Hi,
>
> I have been running qmail for about 2 months now and everything has been
> great :-) I have a very simple setup. I host web sites on the server using
> Apache, and when someone uses a perl script though there web site, email
> sent by perl script has a return-path of
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I thought qmail might use the username of the Apache web server as the
> return-path but it doesn't. Anyway to control what the return-path is? I
> have qmail setup to use the "alias" username to store mail and the Maildir
> format. So my /var/qmail/control/virtualdomains file looks like -
>
> websiteurl.com:alias-websiteurl
>
> Any ideas? All the best,
>
> Jon
>
>
hi all-
i currently have a setup where one central mail server receives all mail
for a primary domain, then redistributes it to subdomains (eg satellite
offices) as necessary. this is currently done with fastforward and SMTP.
i'd like to try out QMTP, and use this to forward mail from the central
server out to the satellites. is there an easy way to cofigure the cenral
server to know who it can/should speak QMTP with? it seems very
straightforward to receive QMTP messages, but i'm not sure if there's a
great way to decide when to send QMTP mail.
thanks-
dan
On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 09:17:09PM -0500, Daniel Kelley wrote:
> i currently have a setup where one central mail server receives all mail
> for a primary domain, then redistributes it to subdomains (eg satellite
> offices) as necessary. this is currently done with fastforward and SMTP.
> i'd like to try out QMTP, and use this to forward mail from the central
> server out to the satellites. is there an easy way to cofigure the cenral
> server to know who it can/should speak QMTP with? it seems very
> straightforward to receive QMTP messages, but i'm not sure if there's a
> great way to decide when to send QMTP mail.
Try this patch to qmail: http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/qmail-qmtpc.html
Or this one: http://www.qmail.org/qmail-1.03-qmtpc.patch
in conjunction with: http://cr.yp.to/proto/mxps.txt
Chris
PGP signature
On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 09:17:09PM -0500, Daniel Kelley wrote:
>
> hi all-
>
> i currently have a setup where one central mail server receives all mail
> for a primary domain, then redistributes it to subdomains (eg satellite
> offices) as necessary. this is currently done with fastforward and SMTP.
> i'd like to try out QMTP, and use this to forward mail from the central
> server out to the satellites. is there an easy way to cofigure the cenral
> server to know who it can/should speak QMTP with? it seems very
> straightforward to receive QMTP messages, but i'm not sure if there's a
> great way to decide when to send QMTP mail.
Go to http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/qmail-qmtpc.html, download
the patch and read man qmail-remote on mailroutes.
Greetz, Peter.
if i send from my host to my self it works, but if i try to send from
another domain to my virtual
domains i recive follow message:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Action: Failed; Status: 5.1.1 (bad destination
mailbox address)
Remote MTA clean-dress.ch: SMTP diagnostic: 550 Unable to relay for
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
my control files:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4 Feb 26 02:24
concurrencyincoming
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 11 Feb 26 02:24 defaultdelivery
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 102 Mar 5 04:03 locals
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 20 Mar 5 04:04 me
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 193 Feb 26 02:24 sqlserver
in locals:
mail.mynewdomain.ch
mynewdomain.ch
mail.virtualdomain.ch
virtualdomain.ch
in me:
mail.mynewdomain.ch
rcpt host i limit with tcpserver
- has any one some idea?
- could it be, because i use sql support ?
thanks, for all solutions.. mike
On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 04:53:56AM +0100, Mike A. Sauvain wrote:
> if i send from my host to my self it works, but if i try to send from
> another domain to my virtual
> domains i recive follow message:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Action: Failed; Status: 5.1.1 (bad destination
> mailbox address)
> Remote MTA clean-dress.ch: SMTP diagnostic: 550 Unable to relay for
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Fix your DNS -- you cannot deliver mail until DNS knows who you are:
gregw@frodo:~$ dig mail.mynewdomain.ch
; <<>> DiG 8.3 <<>> mail.mynewdomain.ch
;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch
;; got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 4
;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUERY SECTION:
;; mail.mynewdomain.ch, type = A, class = IN
SNIP
gregw@frodo:~$ dig mx mynewdomain.ch
; <<>> DiG 8.3 <<>> mx mynewdomain.ch
;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch
;; got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 4
;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUERY SECTION:
;; mynewdomain.ch, type = MX, class = IN
SNIP
I even went so far as to query an authoritative NS for .ch -- NXDOMAIN
all the way.
--
Greg White
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent
revolution inevitable.
-- John F. Kennedy
Hi guys,
I am trying to setup vqregister on Redhat 7.0 but Iam getting this error
that
vpopmail.c: In function `add_user`
vpopmail.c:31:warning: passing arg 4 of `vadduser` makes interger from
pointer without a cast
vpopmail.c:31: too many arguments to function `vadduser`
how can I go about this problem
Thanx
Eric
Systems Engineer
Infocom Uganda Limited
Tel:077409672 or 075409672
Hello All,
Is it possible to make an pop3 authentication logging, So I could see
who and when where connecting to qmail pop3 service?
Best regards,
Eduard
