Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
Mark Sapiro wrote: Andy Heath wrote: so how does subject:.*[SPAM}.* (admitredly meaning s or p etc) trigger the behaviour but subject.*spam not trigger it ? Because on the second and subsequent passes through it is looking at the subject of the notice to the owner which contains 's', 'p', 'a' and 'm' but not 'spam'. I.e. it is looking at Subject: %(listname)s post from %(sender)s requires approval with the appropriate substitutions for %(listname)s and %(sender)s. ok I got it now. And in fact redefining OWNER_PIPELINE would not be the best approach - knowing that the RE is applied to both messages and getting it right is the way to go. ( so I want subject.*\[SPAM\].* ). I did log a feature request for the other issue. Thanks for all your help Mark. If someone could do an ls -R or ls -lR (if there are links) of a 2.1.5 mailman directory and post it it would help figure out where fedora puts all the pieces (I'll build a list of links from it so it looks like a normal mailman directory and I can work with it more easily). OFF-TOPIC below: Standards compliance (fedora) is one thing (I work in standards) but when everyone already has a fine standard (put it in the mailman user directory) and the community has no plans to change that then i find it very silly to just throw that away (when people in a community don't have a standard practice and need pulling together then imposing one is good but the mailman community already have a very good de facto standard that its barmy to change without getting the community on board). I'd prefer to stick with normal mailman practice. In fact I considered not using the fedora package and building mailman by hand as I used to do. I approve of standards for where to put things but communities have to be brought along, standards can't be dictated. Next machine I build won't be fedora - not knowing where things are feels like working with MS. andy -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showamp;file=faq01.027.htp
Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 09:50 +0100, Andy Heath wrote: If someone could do an ls -R or ls -lR (if there are links) of a 2.1.5 mailman directory and post it it would help figure out where fedora puts all the pieces (I'll build a list of links from it so it looks like a normal mailman directory and I can work with it more easily). There are two much easier ways to get this information: 1) read the documentation (/usr/share/doc/mailman-*/INSTALL.REDHAT) 2) rpm -ql mailman (-ql prints a package file list) OFF-TOPIC below: Standards compliance (fedora) is one thing (I work in standards) but when everyone already has a fine standard (put it in the mailman user directory) and the community has no plans to change that then i find it very silly to just throw that away The directory change was dictated by the need to integrate with the SELinux security policy. This is a positive technology advancement. Adhering to the FHS (Filesystem Hierarchy Standard) is a stated goal and appreciated by many. Most people prefer distributions that integrate packages into a coherent system that follow established rules. Individual package defaults are not a standard. -- John Dennis [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showamp;file=faq01.027.htp
Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
OFF-TOPIC below: Standards compliance (fedora) is one thing (I work in standards) but when everyone already has a fine standard (put it in the mailman user directory) and the community has no plans to change that then i find it very silly to just throw that away The directory change was dictated by the need to integrate with the SELinux security policy. This is a positive technology advancement. Adhering to the FHS (Filesystem Hierarchy Standard) is a stated goal and appreciated by many. Most people prefer distributions that integrate packages into a coherent system that follow established rules. Individual package defaults are not a standard. I note your email address John (redhat.com) and observe your defensiveness on this. I differ on this (and I do work in the standards world). YMMV - there is no right answer and I qualified all the things above as opinions and tried not to make personally projective statements of opinion such as Most people prefer I completely appreciate the reasons for the FHS but not the way it is applied to mailman in the community. One reason for example is that it means I have to learn TWO standards - the mailman way and the Fedora way and constantly be mentally mapping between them - otherwise if I want the latest update I am dependent on redhat to have packaged it (which is as bad as Ms.) The *sensible* way to implement standards with a community is to get them on board not redesign their work. If the mailman developer community adopts the FHS for mailman then that's a different story entirely and I would follow without complaint. These are my views, not those of any company and I'm not claiming any blanket truths except that standards are only as useful as their adoption by communities. The ls -lR of /home/mailman would still be useful andy -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showamp;file=faq01.027.htp
Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
At 4:08 PM +0100 2005-06-14, Andy Heath wrote: If the mailman developer community adopts the FHS for mailman then that's a different story entirely and I would follow without complaint. SELinux and the FHS are both specific to a particular OS -- Linux. We have to support dozens of different OSes. It would be just as silly to apply a standard appropriate for Linux to an operating system like Xenix, as it would be to do the reverse. We have no choice but to create our own standards that are applicable across all the platforms we support. Of course, we will do what we can to make these standards something that can be changed at installation time, if someone needs to follow a different set of standards for their particular site/platform. Of course, if someone else is going to take those features and create their own standards, or follow alternative standards, and then produce binary installations which will be provided to their customers, then they are also responsible for supporting those modified versions of the package for their customers. RedHat is doing a good job in this area. Others cannot say the same. -- Brad Knowles, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755 SAGE member since 1995. See http://www.sage.org/ for more info. -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showamp;file=faq01.027.htp
Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
Andy Heath wrote: 1. regex matching with some regex'es causes mailman to loop trying to send mail to the list-owner and failing. e.g. this seems ok subject:.*spam but this one causes looping subject:.*[SPAM].* The upper/lower case is immaterial as thes matches ale all 'ignorecase', but you don't want the above regexp in any case since [SPAM] is a character set so the regexp matches anything with an 's', 'p', 'a' or 'm' in the subject. I don't know what would cause the looping, but you want at least subject:.*\[spam\].* as the regexp. What are the reasons (error log, smtp-failure log ?) for the failure in the notification 'loop'? -- Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showamp;file=faq01.027.htp
Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
subject:.*[SPAM].* The upper/lower case is immaterial as thes matches ale all 'ignorecase', but you don't want the above regexp in any case since [SPAM] is a character set so the regexp matches anything with an 's', 'p', 'a' or 'm' in the subject. I don't know what would cause the looping, but you want at least subject:.*\[spam\].* silly me, I should (and do) know that. But still it shouldn't loop as you say (its a legal RE without the escaping). as the regexp. What are the reasons (error log, smtp-failure log ?) for the failure in the notification 'loop'? they don't show as fails at all. What appears to happen is mailman keeps trying to send the mail and succeeding but it keeps doing it again and again. Meanwhile no mail leaves, it just sits in the spool dir. The data directory fills up with .pck files and directories in the spool dir fill up with mail files. I was testing with only one member, one administrator and one or two mails so the looping was obvious. Some boundary condition is failing in the code. I decided I would inform the other admins about this flakeyness and work around it but would it be useful if I set up the situation again and posted the log file contents ? Having been happy with mailman for years this one surprised me (you come to depend on its reliability). The other problem concerns me more because I can't find a good way around it that triggers action from moderators. bogey -- Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showamp;file=faq01.027.htp
Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
Andy Heath wrote: they don't show as fails at all. What appears to happen is mailman keeps trying to send the mail and succeeding but it keeps doing it again and again. Meanwhile no mail leaves, it just sits in the spool dir. What spool directory? The MTA's? The data directory fills up with .pck files and directories in the spool dir fill up with mail files. I was testing with only one member, one administrator and one or two mails so the looping was obvious. Some boundary condition is failing in the code. What is happening is the message is detected as spam and a notise is sent to the listname-owner address with subject %(listname)s post from %(sender)s requires approval with the appropriate substitutions for %(listname)s and %(sender)s. Since this subject matches .*[spam].*, the message to the owner is identified as spam and the whole thing goes again. The solution is to not use regexps which will match the subject of the owner notification or, since this is not completely under your control, remove 'SpamDetect' from OWNER_PIPELINE, i.e. put # This is the pipeline which messages sent to the -owner address go through OWNER_PIPELINE = [ # 'SpamDetect', 'Replybot', 'OwnerRecips', 'ToOutgoing', ] im mm_cfg.py. As far as not including the message body in the notice because of its getting caught in external to Mailman spam filters is concerned, short of hacking the code or not sending the immediate notifications, there's not much you can do. You can submit an RFE at http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=103atid=350103 -- Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showamp;file=faq01.027.htp
Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
Mark Sapiro wrote: Andy Heath wrote: they don't show as fails at all. What appears to happen is mailman keeps trying to send the mail and succeeding but it keeps doing it again and again. Meanwhile no mail leaves, it just sits in the spool dir. What spool directory? The MTA's? No. Fedora has its own ideas about where the components of mailman should live and its broken up all over and the code a tiny bit modified to facilitate that - some in /usr/lib, some in /var/lib, some in /var/spool, some in /etc. Its a pain to work with. In /var/spool there is a mailman directory with these sub directories. I presumed they were normally in the /home/mailman archive bounces commands in news out retry shunt virgin They are not the usual sendmail queues, its before that stage. The data directory fills up with .pck files and directories in the spool dir fill up with mail files. I was testing with only one member, one administrator and one or two mails so the looping was obvious. Some boundary condition is failing in the code. What is happening is the message is detected as spam and a notise is sent to the listname-owner address with subject %(listname)s post from %(sender)s requires approval with the appropriate substitutions for %(listname)s and %(sender)s. Since this subject matches .*[spam].*, the message to the owner is identified as spam and the whole thing goes again. Not sure I understand you. It doesn't get as far as the usual sendmail queues. How does the subject get parsed twice ? The solution is to not use regexps which will match the subject of the owner notification or, since this is not completely under your control, remove 'SpamDetect' from OWNER_PIPELINE, i.e. put # This is the pipeline which messages sent to the -owner address go through OWNER_PIPELINE = [ # 'SpamDetect', 'Replybot', 'OwnerRecips', 'ToOutgoing', ] im mm_cfg.py. As far as not including the message body in the notice because of its getting caught in external to Mailman spam filters is concerned, short of hacking the code or not sending the immediate notifications, there's not much you can do. You can submit an RFE at http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=103atid=350103 Thanks I will. The madness is that having recieved spam the last sensible thing to do is post it out again :-). Cheers andy -- Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan -- andy ___ Andy Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showamp;file=faq01.027.htp
Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
Mark, Since this subject matches .*[spam].*, the message to the owner is identified as spam and the whole thing goes again. Not sure I understand you. It doesn't get as far as the usual sendmail queues. How does the subject get parsed twice ? The solution is to not use regexps which will match the subject of the owner notification or, since this is not completely under your control, remove 'SpamDetect' from OWNER_PIPELINE, i.e. put # This is the pipeline which messages sent to the -owner address go through OWNER_PIPELINE = [ # 'SpamDetect', 'Replybot', 'OwnerRecips', 'ToOutgoing', ] im mm_cfg.py. so how does subject:.*[SPAM}.* (admitredly meaning s or p etc) trigger the behaviour but subject.*spam not trigger it ? Also - where is this code normally ? I presume SpamDetect just calls the rules defined in the spam section, nothing cleverer. And if I do decide to separate owners and moderators I may need to do the same trick for moderators - where is that code ? (sorry but with directories all over the place its horrible finding and grepping.) - presume there's a MODERATOR_PIPELINE or similar. andy -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showamp;file=faq01.027.htp
Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
Andy Heath wrote: Mark Sapiro wrote: Andy Heath wrote: they don't show as fails at all. What appears to happen is mailman keeps trying to send the mail and succeeding but it keeps doing it again and again. Meanwhile no mail leaves, it just sits in the spool dir. What spool directory? The MTA's? No. Fedora has its own ideas about where the components of mailman should live and its broken up all over and the code a tiny bit modified to facilitate that - some in /usr/lib, some in /var/lib, some in /var/spool, some in /etc. Its a pain to work with. In /var/spool there is a mailman directory with these sub directories. I presumed they were normally in the /home/mailman archive bounces commands in news out retry shunt virgin They are not the usual sendmail queues, its before that stage. Right. I understand that Red Hat is trying to be more standards compliant in where they put things; thus the separation of things into /var/lib/, /usr/lib/, /usr/spool/, but I would expect those mailman queue directories to be in /var/spool/mailman/qfiles/ and I would tend to refer to the directory as qfiles, not spool; thus, my confusion. The data directory fills up with .pck files and directories in the spool dir fill up with mail files. I was testing with only one member, one administrator and one or two mails so the looping was obvious. Some boundary condition is failing in the code. What is happening is the message is detected as spam and a notise is sent to the listname-owner address with subject %(listname)s post from %(sender)s requires approval with the appropriate substitutions for %(listname)s and %(sender)s. Since this subject matches .*[spam].*, the message to the owner is identified as spam and the whole thing goes again. Not sure I understand you. It doesn't get as far as the usual sendmail queues. How does the subject get parsed twice ? If I am correct here, what is happening is the 'approval' notice is placed in the virgin queue with a destination of [EMAIL PROTECTED] It is then actually sent out and delivered right back to Mailman as a message for owner listname. This is how owner notification works in general. In your case, when it comes back in to the owner address it is processed through the pipeline of handlers defined in OWNER_PIPELINE which normally contains SpamDetect as the first handler. Thus, because of the overly generous regexp, the notice is held as spam and the process repeats. If you look in Mailman's 'smtp' log or the sendmail logs, I think you'll see that there is an outgoing message per loop. -- Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showamp;file=faq01.027.htp
Re: [Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
Andy Heath wrote: so how does subject:.*[SPAM}.* (admitredly meaning s or p etc) trigger the behaviour but subject.*spam not trigger it ? Because on the second and subsequent passes through it is looking at the subject of the notice to the owner which contains 's', 'p', 'a' and 'm' but not 'spam'. I.e. it is looking at Subject: %(listname)s post from %(sender)s requires approval with the appropriate substitutions for %(listname)s and %(sender)s. Also - where is this code normally ? I presume SpamDetect just calls the rules defined in the spam section, nothing cleverer. The handler Mailman/Handlers/SpamDetect.py just implements header_filter_rules and if there is a match and the action is Hold, it calls the hold_for_approval() method in Mailman/Handlers/Hold.py to actually hold the message and send the notice. And if I do decide to separate owners and moderators I may need to do the same trick for moderators - where is that code ? (sorry but with directories all over the place its horrible finding and grepping.) - presume there's a MODERATOR_PIPELINE or similar. No. There's little if any difference between an owner and a moderator except for which password(s) they know. There is no MODERATOR_PIPELINE because there is no listname-moderator address. There is an ability internally in mailman to send to owners, not including moderators, but I think this is used only by bounce processing. -- Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, Californiabetter use your sense - B. Dylan -- Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=showamp;file=faq01.027.htp
