Re: QMAILQUEUE patch for qmail-1.03
Bruce Guenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: than the obvious overhead of adding /bin/sh to the execution path? Is this overhead significant enough to make such a modification a bad idea? Are there quoting problems to expect? If yes, I would leave the patch the way it is now. Regards, Frank
newbie question (it's an easy one i'm sure, but it's not in the FAQ)
Hi guys, I've installed the mdk (Mandrake) qmail rpm package on my Mandrake 7.2 box. I've got it set up so that it's dealing with local mail quite nicely, and now i'm ready to use fetchmail, which is also installed, to download mail from a pop server. qmail is running. If i check the ps listing, i see, in part: [root@homer init.d]# ps -ef |grep qmail root 29806 29805 1 Jun01 ?02:43:31 supervise qmail-pop3d root 29808 29805 0 Jun01 ?00:00:00 supervise qmail-send root 29810 29805 1 Jun01 ?02:55:05 supervise qmail-smtpd Shouldn't qmail-smtpd be listening to port 25? If i try to telnet to port 25 of my own box (from my own box) i get Connection refused. My firewall is totally disabled at the time that i am working on this. If i can't get this to work, then obviously fetchmail can't do it's job. Can anyone help me on this? Thanks, John __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Re: newbie question (it's an easy one i'm sure, but it's not in theFAQ)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- John Wolford wrote: qmail is running. Nope, not quite ... If i check the ps listing, i see, in part: [root@homer init.d]# ps -ef |grep qmail root 29806 29805 1 Jun01 ?02:43:31 supervise qmail-pop3d root 29808 29805 0 Jun01 ?00:00:00 supervise qmail-send root 29810 29805 1 Jun01 ?02:55:05 supervise qmail-smtpd That means svscan knows about it, but hasn't been told to start it. I don't know Thing One about the Mandrake rpm, so you may have an init script which does this, but what you specifically need to do is this (assuming here for the sake of argument that svscan uses /service as its working directory): # svc -u /service/qmail-* Then your ps should tell a very different story. Good luck -d - -- David Talkington http://www.spotnet.org PGP key: http://www.prairienet.org/~dtalk/dt000823.asc -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.75-6 iQEVAwUBOySDP71ZYOtSwT+tAQH8iwgAtZFfnUdA9KzWbLfmJz+CdvAdvhrXozWZ KZCMunZdzQW5XL+yS12h6a4RBh2QK67eSXh3sU6w26a+xyusUqeu179DfACQsTbX nkMJ6yyh8bIaQVANoBtJrxpCrgrTvK8xhMoc25zMJUrCkDIlXsjpDwug/ru+t5kW cS0puflj6eg38+fvFtb0e9LaeQF6QucgabWi/JUOEadgzyDcJHJ/Q4kmOMJgw1qQ qIqqxVRSGSxukdqXBDKgC2HjDSkHHl62EA9OseFph5S8W65LtXfo8hO0XKX5hQmr rvcBMBi+8u4Zb82j5pZMIXzbQJFj+LLF0kc6HdIr0IjUnkVSelCDYw== =EUp9 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch for qmail-1.03
On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 10:26:28PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote:
I've been contemplating rewriting the patch to do an exec of
{ /bin/sh, -c, $QMAILQUEUE } instead of exec'ing $QMAILQUEUE as-is.
This would allow for putting the contents of the script named by
$QMAILQUEUE (which is frequently a one-line shell script anyways) into
the variable itself. Are there any downsides to this approach other
than the obvious overhead of adding /bin/sh to the execution path? Is
this overhead significant enough to make such a modification a bad idea?
Given that the same thing is currently done by writing a one-line shell
script, I really can't see the advantage given the extra overhead...
I've had several occassions with other products where I have the opposite
problem. They allow you to call /bin/sh -c 'program arg1 arg2...', and I
find it doesn't work as expected. So I end up writing one-line shell scripts
and call that instead :-)
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Unix/Special Projects, Trimble NZ
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Saving mail
Hi all, Can you help me to save all mails which are outgoing from my SMTP. So can you give me an advice or a program to do that. I have seen that the question had been asked by an other qmail user, but i hadn't no answer. Does the solution exists? Thank you!! [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
qmail Digest 11 Jun 2001 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1392
qmail Digest 11 Jun 2001 10:00:00 - Issue 1392 Topics (messages 63936 through 63957): Re: unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] 63936 by: Harald Hanche-Olsen virtual subdomains and non-remapping 63937 by: R Signes 63944 by: Charles Cazabon 63945 by: R Signes sending mail from scripts fails 63938 by: Vincent 63939 by: Bruno Wolff III troube! 63940 by: budsz 63941 by: Frank Tegtmeyer On Behalf Of . . . 63942 by: Guus 63943 by: Joost van Baal 63946 by: Guus Rewrite (.*)@foo.com to \\[EMAIL PROTECTED] 63947 by: Troy Settle 63948 by: peter green Re: QMAILQUEUE patch for qmail-1.03 63949 by: Bruce Guenter 63953 by: Frank Tegtmeyer 63956 by: Jason Haar Re: how to use qmail-queue 63950 by: Bruce Guenter Re: qmail-qfilter logging? 63951 by: Bruce Guenter Re: qmail troubleshooting 63952 by: Bruce Guenter newbie question (it's an easy one i'm sure, but it's not in the FAQ) 63954 by: John Wolford 63955 by: David Talkington Saving mail 63957 by: Benoit Delagarde 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] -- + Thomas Flüeli [EMAIL PROTECTED]: | please unsubscribe me!! Did you notice the header line in all mail from this list saying Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm ? *Please* send a message to the indicated address, then follow instructions. - Harald Greetings. I'd like to set up a virtual subdomain on my systems. Something like spamgoeshere.manxome.org, and have mail for [EMAIL PROTECTED] delivered to uname-spam-ext on the mail exchanger. I don't want all unames to be equivocal, though, so I don't think virtualhost fits the bill. I guess I could use procmail for this, but it would be /way/ more complicated. Help? -- rjbs PGP signature R Signes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to set up a virtual subdomain on my systems. Something like spamgoeshere.manxome.org, and have mail for [EMAIL PROTECTED] delivered to uname-spam-ext on the mail exchanger. I don't want all unames to be equivocal, though, so I don't think virtualhost fits the bill. It could. You would do the spamgoeshere.manxome.org:spamuser trick in virtualdomains, then have ~alias/.qmail-spamuser-default file which does something like: |/path/to/forward $DEFAULT-spam@domain I'm not sure what the -ext part of your question above refers to. 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. --- In a message dated Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 02:22:05PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: R Signes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to set up a virtual subdomain on my systems. Something like spamgoeshere.manxome.org, and have mail for [EMAIL PROTECTED] delivered to uname-spam-ext on the mail exchanger. I'm not sure what the -ext part of your question above refers to. Hypothetical: I go and buy a bicycle from Bikestore Inc. They ask for my email. I say, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Then, that mail gets delivered to bob-spam-bikestore (processed by my .qmail-spam-bikestore). -- rjbs PGP signature Hi. I'm using qmail-1.03 I'm having problems sending mail from withing perl scripts. The scirpt I used worked perfectly on a linux server using sendmail. Now I'n using it on our news server with qmail. The scirpt functions okay, but there is no mail sent. I've made the proper links to /var/qmail/bin/sendmail. When I start sendmail -t (the same way the script does) I can create mail messages, but the script doesn't Anyone has an idea what's causing the problems? Thanks, Vincent On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 05:21:58PM +0200, Vincent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi. I'm using qmail-1.03 I'm having problems sending mail from withing perl scripts. The scirpt I used worked perfectly on a linux server using sendmail. Now I'n using it on our news server with qmail. The scirpt functions okay, but there is no mail sent. I've made the proper links to /var/qmail/bin/sendmail. When I start sendmail -t (the same way the script does) I can create mail messages, but the script doesn't Anyone has an idea what's causing the problems? Thanks, You haven't given us any information that would allow us to figure out what is going wrong. The obvious debugging technique is to record a copy of what you are piping to sendmail to see if that is a problem. It also
Time Stamp
Can someone please tell my why my Qmail time stamps its emails plus 1 hour. I'm in the UK, so I have set my Linux to GMT. The date command reports the system time correctly. Slightly confused ?
Re: Time Stamp
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 12:00:21PM +0100, Alastair Rundlett wrote: Can someone please tell my why my Qmail time stamps its emails plus 1 hour. I'm in the UK, so I have set my Linux to GMT. The date command reports the system time correctly. Qmail records times in email headers in GMT, not localtime. Le'me guess your offset to GMT is 1 hours (at least summertimes). The archives are full of discussions regarding this. -- * Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de * * Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany * Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
Re: Time Stamp
Alastair Rundlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Can someone please tell my why my Qmail time stamps its emails plus 1 hour. I'm in the UK, so I have set my Linux to GMT. The date command reports the system time correctly. You confused your daylight saving time setup. Do you use GMT or local time on your hardware clock? Did you configure your system to treat the hardware clock as GMT or as local time? Regards, Frank
Re: On Behalf Of . . .
Problem solved! It's a known bug in Netscape 4.6 etc. for unix. Workaround is in changing the prefs: exit netscape first, because it writes the preferences on exit cd $HOME/.netscape echo 'user_pref(mail.suppress_sender_header, true); ' preferences.js echo 'user_pref(mail.suppress_sender_header, true); ' liprefs.js restart Guus. Joost van Baal wrote: snip It's your mua which adds the Sender: header. You could try configuring your client to add a more sane Sender: header, or use a mua which doesn't add such a header.
Re: Im not sure if this is normal?
This is (possibly) normal. Do: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-qread and examine the logs (tail -f /var/log/qmail/current). Take also a look at: http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#retry-schedule On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 12:53:24AM -0700, Todd A. Jacobs wrote: On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Mike Jimenez wrote: Is my mail que stuck or is this normal.Is there also a way to manage the que? /var/qmail/bin/qmail-qstat messages in queue: 243 messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0 Is qmail running? Have you tried sending SIG_ALRM? Have you tried restarting qmail? -- Todd A. Jacobs CodeGnome Consulting, LTD -- Jose Celestino [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Universal key of inception, pulled out of the grind, The growing seed of creation and time-- Borknagar - Colossus
Using qmail-queue
Hi, My company runs quite a large opt-in newsletter (around 60,000 members, growing by about a 1000 every few days), up to a few months ago we sent the newsletter by using qmail-inject for every email address on the list (which was slow). So we started to use the qmail-queue directly (using the info on the man page for it) so we give qmail-queue the message file with all the headers, and also the list of email addresses. Work well, and super fast :-) But last week one of our bosses found that Hotmail has a bulk mail folder so all incoming email to Hotmail users which does not have there email address in the To: field of the email, goes into this folder. And because we use qmail-queue, all the emails sent has the same To: fieild (we use the email address for our site)and therefore all our newsletters go into there bulk folder. So is there anyway of having the email address of the user being emailed in the To: field without using qmail-inject for every message? Looking at this mailing list (which uses ezmlm) it seems everyone has there own Return-Path made up of my email address on this list. So if its possable to have a different return-path for every email, is it possable to change the To header and still use qmail-queue? Any ideas? We can't really use ezmlm as we have our very own customised software for our mailing list which we have built and added to for years. Thanks in advance, Jon
Re: Using qmail-queue
Jon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Any ideas? We can't really use ezmlm as we have our very own customised software for our mailing list which we have built and added to for years. If you use qmail-queue directly anyway where is the problem to replace a placeholder string in the To: header during injection? sed would do but three lines of C should also. Regards, Frank
Re: Using qmail-queue
Jon writes: So is there anyway of having the email address of the user being emailed in the To: field without using qmail-inject for every message? You can use the following patch to qmail-remote, or if that's not sufficient, I have a proprietary patch which allows substitution of fields from a database, conditional substitution, paragraph reformatting, etc. It's a subset of the TRAC programming language, and could be extended to be such. liThere's also the a href=http://www.ezmlm.org/pub/patches/qmail-verh-0.02.tar.gz;qmail-verh patch/a. This allows substitution of the recipient local/host parts into the message. Useful for inserting a customized mailto: URL for list-unsubscribe into the body of the message. -- -russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | John Hartford, RIP Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
RE: Time Stamp
It still ain't right ! If I inject mail locally the time is out by about 7min. Any incoming external mail is out by +1 hour, how is this possible? What do have to set where to get this thing right. Alastair Rundlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Can someone please tell my why my Qmail time stamps its emails plus 1 hour. I'm in the UK, so I have set my Linux to GMT. The date command reports the system time correctly. You confused your daylight saving time setup. Do you use GMT or local time on your hardware clock? Did you configure your system to treat the hardware clock as GMT or as local time? Regards, Frank
Re: Time Stamp
Alastair Rundlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If I inject mail locally the time is out by about 7min. Any incoming Which time? From the Date:-header or from Received-Headers? external mail is out by +1 hour, how is this possible? Again: like above, which time? What do have to set where to get this thing right. Short answer: it depends. 1. Which operating system do you run? 2. Are other operating systems too installed on your computer? 3. Do you use an Intel compatible PC or some other system? 4. If Intel PC, how is the time set in your BIOS compared to your local (daylight saving) time? 5. If you use Linux, did you specify how your hardware clock is set up? If so, how? Regards, Frank
RE: Time Stamp
Thx Frank Which time? From the Date:-header or from Received-Headers? The Received-Headers reported in Outlook 2000. Short answer: Answer 1. Mandrake 8.0 Answer 2. No Answer 3. Intel Answer 4. Bios and local time are the same Answer 5. Hardware clock is to GMT Alastair Rundlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If I inject mail locally the time is out by about 7min. Any incoming Which time? From the Date:-header or from Received-Headers? external mail is out by +1 hour, how is this possible? Again: like above, which time? What do have to set where to get this thing right. Short answer: it depends. 1. Which operating system do you run? 2. Are other operating systems too installed on your computer? 3. Do you use an Intel compatible PC or some other system? 4. If Intel PC, how is the time set in your BIOS compared to your local (daylight saving) time? 5. If you use Linux, did you specify how your hardware clock is set up? If so, how? Regards, Frank
Re: virtual subdomains and non-remapping
R Signes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 02:22:05PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: R Signes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to set up a virtual subdomain on my systems. Something like spamgoeshere.manxome.org, and have mail for [EMAIL PROTECTED] delivered to uname-spam-ext on the mail exchanger. I'm not sure what the -ext part of your question above refers to. Hypothetical: I go and buy a bicycle from Bikestore Inc. They ask for my email. I say, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Then, that mail gets delivered to bob-spam-bikestore (processed by my .qmail-spam-bikestore). In the regular domain instead of spamgoeshere.manxome.org, if I remember the original question correctly. The solution I proposed in my last email would still work here; you would want to be looking at the various environment variables (EXT2, EXT3, possibly HOST3, etc). The problem comes if spammers start trying to send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- that won't correspond with real accounts. 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. ---
Re: Saving mail
Benoit Delagarde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can you help me to save all mails which are outgoing from my SMTP. So can you give me an advice or a program to do that. I have seen that the question had been asked by an other qmail user, but i hadn't no answer. Does the solution exists? See the solution in Dan's FAQ for saving _all_ mail. Then filter it yourself to decide what you want to look at. Outgoing mail comes out of the same queue as locally-delivered mail, so trapping it all is simplest at the point of queue injection. 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. ---
Re: Time Stamp
Alastair Rundlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Answer 4. Bios and local time are the same Answer 5. Hardware clock is to GMT Ok, that's your problem. Set your BIOS clock to one hour later (now it's about 3:35pm your local time, so set the BIOS clock to 2:35pm. You could also use hwclock if it's available but this may increase your confusion :) Regards, Frank
Re: Using qmail-queue
So is there anyway of having the email address of the user being emailed in the To: field without using qmail-inject for every message? Using plain qmail, no, it tries very hard no to mutate messages as they pass through. For a similar application I wrote a little perl module called qspam to send out lots of customized messages. It passes each message directly to qmail-remote, and only if that fails passes it to qmail-queue to retry. It runs many qmail-remote processes in parallel, and on any half-decent list rarely has to queue a message so it pumps out mail about as fast as qmail itself does. For me it does a pretty decent job of sending out messages to an 18,000 address list I have. It uses files in /tmp rather than pipes because that makes the code a lot simpler and it seems to me that files in a ramdisk /tmp should be about as fast as pipes. You can find it at http://wx.iecc.com/Qspam.pm -- John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 [EMAIL PROTECTED], Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
problems with pop3
I recently setup a new mail server using qmail. Now I can send mail all I want with no problems however when I try to recieve mail via pop3 (using qmail-pop3d) it does not pick up any of my new mail. I've check my Maildir/new and can see the new messages there but my client does not pick anything up. What am I doing wrong. Here are snips of a few of my config files: .qmail for user /var/qmail/users/oims-net/toddg/Maildir/ users/assign =oims-toddg:popuser:1009:1003:/var/qmail/users/oims-net/toddg/::: Todd Grimes
Re: problems with pop3
Todd Grimes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recently setup a new mail server using qmail. Now I can send mail all I want with no problems however when I try to recieve mail via pop3 (using qmail-pop3d) it does not pick up any of my new mail. I've check my Maildir/new and can see the new messages there but my client does not pick anything up. What am I doing wrong. Here are snips of a few of my config files: .qmail for user /var/qmail/users/oims-net/toddg/Maildir/ How are you starting qmail-pop3d? Typically, it's with an argument of ./Maildir/, telling it to look for a Maildir named Maildir in the user's home directory. However, your .qmail file above looks like you're doing some sort of virtual domain setup, which that won't work for. Post the script you're starting qmail-pop3d with. Also, if you're doing virtual domains, consider using vmailmgr. 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. ---
Re: problems with pop3
I am running the qmail-pop3d from inetd At 09:01 AM 6/11/2001 -0600, you wrote: Todd Grimes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recently setup a new mail server using qmail. Now I can send mail all I want with no problems however when I try to recieve mail via pop3 (using qmail-pop3d) it does not pick up any of my new mail. I've check my Maildir/new and can see the new messages there but my client does not pick anything up. What am I doing wrong. Here are snips of a few of my config files: .qmail for user /var/qmail/users/oims-net/toddg/Maildir/ How are you starting qmail-pop3d? Typically, it's with an argument of ./Maildir/, telling it to look for a Maildir named Maildir in the user's home directory. However, your .qmail file above looks like you're doing some sort of virtual domain setup, which that won't work for. Post the script you're starting qmail-pop3d with. Also, if you're doing virtual domains, consider using vmailmgr. 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. ---
Re: problems with pop3
Todd Grimes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Post the script you're starting qmail-pop3d with. I am running the qmail-pop3d from inetd Q: What colour is the sky? A: This tastes like apple. This will likely affect the quantity and quality of suggestions you receive for fixing your problem. 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. ---
Multiple recipients to remote domain
I just ran a test where I created a single message file, with all headers, and the BCC list was 10,000+ copies of my own address on a remote domain. I used qmail-inject to send the message. What I expected to happen was for the local QMAIL to make a single connection to the remote domain, deliver the single message, and have the remote system make 10,000+ deliveries to the remote account. The local QMAIL logs seem to indicate that the local system actually sent 10,000+ separate messages to the remote domain, possibly in small batches. The log appeared to grow in spurts, but I am not sure if that is because several copies were sent with each connection, or it was co-incidental with how fast the remote system accepted them. Actually, it is not clear whether QMAIL sent 10,000+ copies of the single message, or if it sent a single copy in a single transaction and it just took a while to fill in the log file (each line having an incremental date/time stamp). If I can, I'll try to decifer the logs on the remote system to see what happened, but I am wondering (asking) what QMAIL's behavior is supposed to be when there are multiple recipients on a single message being sent to a remote domain. Is there only a single copy of the message sent to the remote host in a single transaction? Does the local QMAIL break down the local message into discrete messages, one per recipient, and then send them to the (same) remote host? Thanks. -- Roger Walker Tier III Messaging/News Team Internet Applications, National Consumer IP TELUS Corporation 780-493-2471
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch for qmail-1.03
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 08:21:13AM +0200, Frank Tegtmeyer wrote: Bruce Guenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: than the obvious overhead of adding /bin/sh to the execution path? Is this overhead significant enough to make such a modification a bad idea? Are there quoting problems to expect? What kind of problems? The value of $QMAILQUEUE would be passed in to /bin/sh -c as-is, and /bin/sh would expand quotes, variables, etc. -- Bruce Guenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://em.ca/~bruceg/ http://untroubled.org/ OpenPGP key: 699980E8 / D0B7 C8DD 365D A395 29DA 2E2A E96F B2DC 6999 80E8 PGP signature
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 09:51:46AM -0600, Roger Walker wrote: I just ran a test where I created a single message file, with all headers, and the BCC list was 10,000+ copies of my own address on a remote domain. I used qmail-inject to send the message. What I expected to happen was for the local QMAIL to make a single connection to the remote domain, deliver the single message, and have the remote system make 10,000+ deliveries to the remote account. Nope. The local QMAIL logs seem to indicate that the local system actually sent 10,000+ separate messages to the remote domain, possibly in small batches. The log appeared to grow in spurts, but I am not sure if It did 10.000 SMTP connections to send the message 10.000 times total. If I can, I'll try to decifer the logs on the remote system to see what happened, but I am wondering (asking) what QMAIL's behavior is supposed to be when there are multiple recipients on a single message being sent to a remote domain. Is there only a single copy of the message sent to the remote host in a single transaction? Does the local QMAIL break down the local message into discrete messages, one per recipient, and then send them to the (same) remote host? Yes. qmail always handles only one recipient per SMTP connection. Greetz, Peter -- Against Free Sex! http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html
RE: Time Stamp
Ok got the external email side working correctly using hwclock. Also I've basically figured out the local time problem, this was because my system time was set incorrect and daylight savings was adding 1 hour to that. Now all I have do is figure out why there is a 10sec difference with local mail in MS Outlook ? -Original Message- From: Frank Tegtmeyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 June 2001 15:35 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Time Stamp Alastair Rundlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Answer 4. Bios and local time are the same Answer 5. Hardware clock is to GMT Ok, that's your problem. Set your BIOS clock to one hour later (now it's about 3:35pm your local time, so set the BIOS clock to 2:35pm. You could also use hwclock if it's available but this may increase your confusion :) Regards, Frank
fetchmail + badmailfrom
Hi, I surfed the archives, but there were only problems no solution. I fetch mail with fetchmail (;-) and want to block some addresses and domains. But fetchmail interrupts after getting the first blocked mail and won't receive any further ones. As far as I can see it is qmail and not fetchmail related. Any hints? Thanks Tom
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
Roger Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just ran a test where I created a single message file, with all headers, and the BCC list was 10,000+ copies of my own address on a remote domain. I used qmail-inject to send the message. What I expected to happen was for the local QMAIL to make a single connection to the remote domain, deliver the single message, and have the remote system make 10,000+ deliveries to the remote account. The local QMAIL logs seem to indicate that the local system actually sent 10,000+ separate messages to the remote domain, possibly in small batches. qmail never batches recipients to remote domains. One of the (several) reasons for this is it would make VERP impossible. If I can, I'll try to decifer the logs on the remote system to see what happened, but I am wondering (asking) what QMAIL's behavior is supposed to be when there are multiple recipients on a single message being sent to a remote domain. qmail delivers each separately, as you have observed. Is there only a single copy of the message sent to the remote host in a single transaction? No. Does the local QMAIL break down the local message into discrete messages, one per recipient, and then send them to the (same) remote host? Yes. 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. ---
how to pipe to qmail-inject
I have a small dilemna, Let's say I want to send an email to 1,000 people...they will allreceive the same email. let's say the I want to send the HTML file witha header: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: blah blah MIME-Version: 1.0; Content-Type: text/html; html body blah blah blahc /body /html How do I pipe it correctly to qmail-inject? I have a text file with the 1,000 people : people.txt I have the HTML I want to send them : whatever.html I can't figure out how to attach is properly to grep...my problem is ...the to field gets blank. Thanks...
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 09:51:46AM -0600, Roger Walker wrote: If I can, I'll try to decifer the logs on the remote system to see what happened, but I am wondering (asking) what QMAIL's behavior is supposed to be when there are multiple recipients on a single message being sent to a remote domain. Is there only a single copy of the message sent to the remote host in a single transaction? No. Does the local QMAIL break down the local message into discrete messages, one per recipient, and then send them to the (same) remote host? Yes. As documented somewhere on cr.yp.to/qmail.html. -- * Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.bsws.de * * Roedingsmarkt 14, 20459 Hamburg, Germany * Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie)
many mails
Hi, I am setting up a mailing system that must send very very quickly a great number of mails (5,000-10,000) with different text to different recipients. A specialized process gets the body of the messages and the addressees and it is ready to call a "mailer" . I wonder if qmail can help me: my real problem is that I don't wont to call a command (like qmail-inject) for each mail to send, that would slow down terribly. The idea is to prepare directly the messages or to call some APIsto do the right job. I think I can't solve with list servers,becausethe messages are all different. Can you help me ? Thanks P.S. If this is NOT the correct address for this mail, please be patient, but I could'nt figure out anything better. Gianni CampanileWeb Bridges S.r.lVia Mecenate 5900184 Roma - ItalyTel. +39 06 48887224Fax +39 06 48906270e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Time Stamp
Alastair Rundlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ok got the external email side working correctly using hwclock. Fine. Now all I have do is figure out why there is a 10sec difference with local mail in MS Outlook ? Should they be synchronized? Outlook uses the time of the Windows PC. Qmail uses the Time of your Mandrake system. If the systems are not synchronized to each other or against a third system you *will* have time differences. Regards, Frank
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 10:20:57AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: [snip] Is there only a single copy of the message sent to the remote host in a single transaction? No. Hmm, this confuses me. Every transaction contains one message. There are 10.000 transactions. This may or may not be a 'yes' or 'no' to the question. Greetz, Peter -- Against Free Sex! http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html
Re: fetchmail + badmailfrom
Tom Beer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I surfed the archives, but there were only problems no solution. I fetch mail with fetchmail (;-) and want to block some addresses and domains. But fetchmail interrupts after getting the first blocked mail and won't receive any further ones. As far as I can see it is qmail and not fetchmail related. Bogus analysis. You've got fetchmail configured to deliver mail by connecting to port 25 and delivering via SMTP. When qmail-smtpd refuses a message, fetchmail deduces that this method of delivery doesn't work, and refuses to go on. If you insist on having fetchmail deliver via SMTP, you _have_ to have qmail-smtpd accept every message fetchmail retrieves. If you want to filter out messages, do it later in the process (via .qmail files or procmail, etc). 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. ---
Re: how to pipe to qmail-inject
ed lim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a small dilemna, Let's say I want to send an email to 1,000 people...they will all receive the same email. [...] I have a text file with the 1,000 people : people.txt I have the HTML I want to send them : whatever.html [...] I can't figure out how to attach is properly to grep...my problem is ... the to field gets blank. If you're sending the same message to 1000 people, you can't have the person's name show up in the To: header with a stock qmail, unless you have all 1000 recipients show up in the To: header (bad idea). How do I pipe it correctly to qmail-inject? The same way you normally would: $ qmail-inject -f sender@fqdn EOF From: Me sender@fqdn Subject: Make Money Fast To: recipient list not shown: ; bcc: recipient1@fqdn bcc: recipient2@fqdn ... bcc: recipient1000@fqdn HTML /HTML EOF $ 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. ---
Re: many mails
Gianni Campanile [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am setting up a mailing system that must send very very quickly a great number of mails (5,000-10,000) with different text to different recipients. Okay. A specialized process gets the body of the messages and the addressees and it is ready to call a mailer . I wonder if qmail can help me: my real problem is that I don't wont to call a command (like qmail-inject) for each mail to send, that would slow down terribly. The idea is to prepare directly the messages or to call some APIs to do the right job. I think I can't solve with list servers, because the messages are all different. There's much discussion in the qmail list archives about how to accomplish this -- please search the archives for details. You can find a link to the archives at qmail.org. To help you search, you're looking for info on calling qmail-remote directly, and only queueing those messages for which this first delivery attempt is deferred by the remote server, or for which no connection could be established. 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. ---
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
Peter van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 10:20:57AM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: [snip] Is there only a single copy of the message sent to the remote host in a single transaction? No. Hmm, this confuses me. Every transaction contains one message. There are 10.000 transactions. This may or may not be a 'yes' or 'no' to the question. To clarify: no, qmail will not send one copy of the message to 1 recipients at a single MX in a single transaction. Instead, qmail will establish 1 SMTP sessions (transactions) to that MX, and deliver a single copy of the message to one recipient in each of those sessions. 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. ---
RE: many mails
Gianni Campanile [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A specialized process gets the body of the messages and the addressees and it is ready to call a mailer . I wonder if qmail can help me: my real problem is that I don't wont to call a command (like qmail-inject) for each mail to send, that would slow down terribly. How exactly do you plan to do it faster than qmail-inject, and anyway, what could you possibly need to get out faster than qmail-inject is capable of doing? I use a PERL script that can queue up 10,000 messages in a few minutes, and that uses the sendmail replacement--calling qmail-inject directly would probably be a bit faster. Does /anyone/ have a qmail system that can deliver faster than qmail-inject can queue? For that matter, can any mta do it faster than qmail-inject can queue? I'm sure there's one somewhere, but I think it would take a hell of a lot more than 10,000 messages to make a noticeable difference. --joshua.
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
Thanks, Peter and Charles. Looks like I'll have to script a solution that telnets to port 25 on the remote host and issues 10,000+ (650,000+ actually) rcpt to: lines. A manual test seems to have worked, so now I'll have to try automating it. On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 09:51:46AM -0600, Roger Walker wrote: I just ran a test where I created a single message file, with all headers, and the BCC list was 10,000+ copies of my own address on a remote domain. I used qmail-inject to send the message. What I expected to happen was for the local QMAIL to make a single connection to the remote domain, deliver the single message, and have the remote system make 10,000+ deliveries to the remote account. Nope. It did 10.000 SMTP connections to send the message 10.000 times total. Yes. qmail always handles only one recipient per SMTP connection. -- Roger Walker Tier III Messaging/News Team Internet Applications, National Consumer IP TELUS Corporation 780-493-2471
Re: many mails
Gianni Campanile writes: I am setting up a mailing system that must send very very quickly a great number of mails (5,000-10,000) with different text to different recipients. Hmmm... You could get them sent out in about ten seconds, but I don't think you could do any better than that. And even that presumes that you can devote five computers to the task, and of course that all the recipients' servers are up which is not a possibility. -- -russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | John Hartford, RIP Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
qmail-inject and Qmail-scanner on local message
Our web mail (IMP 2.2.4) program injects all mail using qmail-inject, when the email is totally local (i.e. never travels through SMTP) it is never scanned. I've tried adding the QMAILQUEUE variable into Apache to try to trigger the scan but I think it is to far down the loop. Any one have any ideas on this, I am using the qmailqueue.patch maybe if I replaced qmail-queue instead? Thanks for anything. John McCoy, Jr Central Systems Administrator Mills College, Oakland, CA 510-430-3321 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
Charles Cazabon writes: qmail never batches recipients to remote domains. One of the (several) reasons for this is it would make VERP impossible. Not true. It simply means that the remote system would have to implement VERP when qmail-remote tells the smtpd that the envelope sender is list-@[]@host.example.com. Unfortunately, qmail-remote and VERP-compatible smtp servers do not cooperate in that manner. Actually there's no protocol reason why qmail-remote couldn't look for VERP in the EHLO tags, and send over all recipients for the current piece of email along with a VERP envelope sender. Of course, the current structure of qmail-send won't allow for that (even though qmail-remote will). -- -russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | John Hartford, RIP Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
Re: many mails
Joshua Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does /anyone/ have a qmail system that can deliver faster than qmail-inject can queue? Yes. queue disk bandwidth and latency (seeks due to syncs) are limiting factors in some setups. I'm sure there's one somewhere, but I think it would take a hell of a lot more than 10,000 messages to make a noticeable difference. Perhaps not. If you've got a box with eight fast CPUs and multigigabit bandwidth, you can probably spawn 10k qmail-remotes. 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. ---
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
Roger Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks, Peter and Charles. Looks like I'll have to script a solution that telnets to port 25 on the remote host and issues 10,000+ (650,000+ actually) rcpt to: lines. Unnecessary. There's lots of tools to do this; other MTAs do it, and djb wrote serialmail for these sorts of situations. 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. ---
Re: qmail-inject and Qmail-scanner on local message
John McCoy, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our web mail (IMP 2.2.4) program injects all mail using qmail-inject, when the email is totally local (i.e. never travels through SMTP) it is never scanned. I've tried adding the QMAILQUEUE variable into Apache to try to trigger the scan but I think it is to far down the loop. No -- qmail-inject calls qmail-queue and therefore should be affected by Bruce's QMAILQUEUE patch. Are you sure your web mail program isn't running qmail-inject in a scrubbed environment? Or that Apache isn't doing that? 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. ---
RE: many mails
Gianni Campanile [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A specialized process gets the body of the messages and the addressees and it is ready to call a mailer . I wonder if qmail can help me: my real problem is that I don't wont to call a command (like qmail-inject) for each mail to send, that would slow down terribly. How exactly do you plan to do it faster than qmail-inject, and anyway, what could you possibly need to get out faster than qmail-inject is capable of doing? Here is my, possibly similar, situation: We have approximately 650,000 customers/accounts and Marketing wants to send them a monthly newsletter. Our mail system is Intermail running on some 25-30 Sun Enterprise Servers (and there is no chance of it being replaced with QMAIL). As an infrastructure group (we plan the system architecture and then keep it running, plus troubleshoot problems that are passed up from tier I and II), we do not want to be in the business of being a service bureau, so we are looking to offload the mass mailouts. If some third party were to do the mailouts using QMAIL or some other MTA, it would chew up a lot of bandwidth, and it would also invoke our system's anti-spam configuration that counts transactions over short periods of time and blocks offending sites, so it wouldn't be a good solution. Hence my earlier message of today asking how QMAIL handled multiple messages to the same domain. I can Perl script a solution that does a single transaction/connection and fires off the appropriate number of rcpt to: lines with a single copy of the message, and that would be much faster. However, it is also a specialty application, and not applicable for most other mail duties. -- Roger Walker Tier III Messaging/News Team Internet Applications, National Consumer IP TELUS Corporation 780-493-2471
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
Russell Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Charles Cazabon writes: qmail never batches recipients to remote domains. One of the (several) reasons for this is it would make VERP impossible. Not true. It simply means that the remote system would have to implement VERP when qmail-remote tells the smtpd that the envelope sender is list-@[]@host.example.com. Unfortunately, qmail-remote and VERP-compatible smtp servers do not cooperate in that manner. Actually there's no protocol reason why qmail-remote couldn't look for VERP in the EHLO tags, and send over all recipients for the current piece of email along with a VERP envelope sender. Of course, the current structure of qmail-send won't allow for that (even though qmail-remote will). Good clarification. Would you settle for Making VERP work with per-MX batched recipients of a message would require extensive core changes to qmail? I think that basically it boils down to this: if per-MX batching is critical for a particular installation (bandwidth limitations or other issues), and serialmail isn't sufficient, perhaps qmail isn't the right MTA for the job. Of course, the number of installations where this would be true should be very small. 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. ---
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 02:33:53PM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote: Charles Cazabon writes: qmail never batches recipients to remote domains. One of the (several) reasons for this is it would make VERP impossible. Not true. It simply means that the remote system would have to implement VERP when qmail-remote tells the smtpd that the envelope sender is list-@[]@host.example.com. Unfortunately, qmail-remote and VERP-compatible smtp servers do not cooperate in that manner. Actually there's no protocol reason why qmail-remote couldn't look for VERP in the EHLO tags, and send over all recipients for the current piece of email along with a VERP envelope sender. Of course, the current structure of qmail-send won't allow for that (even though qmail-remote will). qmail-remote would have to start saying EHLO ofcourse, in that case. Is VERP a registered EHLO tag? Greetz, Peter -- Against Free Sex! http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html
qpop3-d: connects but doesn´t gives OK
Help! We have a system running bruce´s patched qmail and AVP. It has 400 accounts.It has been running ok for 2 months, but now sometimes pop-3d doesn´t work. I can telnet localhost 110, it greets me but it doesn´t says OK. Sometimes I restart it with the supervise scripts and all returns to normallity, but sometimes it needs a reboot.Any ideas?Thanks from Argentina
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 01:02:40PM -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote: Roger Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks, Peter and Charles. Looks like I'll have to script a solution that telnets to port 25 on the remote host and issues 10,000+ (650,000+ actually) rcpt to: lines. Unnecessary. There's lots of tools to do this; other MTAs do it, and djb wrote serialmail for these sorts of situations. serialmail still does one recipient per mail, but does feed all mails through one SMTP link. What Roger wants is one mail with 650.000 recipients. Greetz, Peter -- Against Free Sex! http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html
Re: vpopmail authentication
You should be invoking qmail-popup, looking something like: /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup virtualdomain.com \ /usr/local/ezmlm/vchkpw /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir If you are using Maildir instead of Mbox. man qmail-popup, vchkpw, and qmail-pop3d for information on options and parameters. -K Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, because you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup. From: Harry [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 19:45:31 -0700 To: Keary Suska [EMAIL PROTECTED], Qmail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: vpopmail authentication i also have the same problem. it is working fine on one server but it is not working on the new server i have just configured. where does it look for authentication. i have modified my qmail-pop3d.init checkpass /home/vpopmail/bin/vchkpw. any help. Harry - Original Message - From: Keary Suska [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Qmail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 4:25 PM Subject: Re: vpopmail authentication Make sure you are using the correct POP id: username%virtualdomain.com otherwise you are checking against /etc/passwd. -K Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger. From: Franco Vecchiato [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 17:24:38 +0200 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: vpopmail authentication I'm trying to use vpopmail with qmail on a Suse Linux PC, but I'm having a problem in retrieving the emails with the POP client. In vpopmail I created a new domain test.it, with a new user utente and password testutente. After setting the right stuff into my DNS server, I sent an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The email has been delivered correctly to vpopmail/domain/test.it/utente/new directory and the logfile reports no errors, but when I try to connect to the mailserver with a POP client (outlook express) configured for this account, I get an authentication failure error message from the server.
RE: qmail-inject and Qmail-scanner on local message
I can see it set in phpinfo() output, but do not know if this is a good test for that. Thanks. -Original Message- From: Charles Cazabon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 12:18 PM To: qmail@list. cr. yp. to Subject: Re: qmail-inject and Qmail-scanner on local message John McCoy, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our web mail (IMP 2.2.4) program injects all mail using qmail-inject, when the email is totally local (i.e. never travels through SMTP) it is never scanned. I've tried adding the QMAILQUEUE variable into Apache to try to trigger the scan but I think it is to far down the loop. No -- qmail-inject calls qmail-queue and therefore should be affected by Bruce's QMAILQUEUE patch. Are you sure your web mail program isn't running qmail-inject in a scrubbed environment? Or that Apache isn't doing that? 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. ---
rpm
anyone have any luck with the qmail rpm? have a box I just want to get up and running fast. * Mick Dobra Systems Administrator MTCO Communications 1-800-859-6826 *
RE: Multiple recipients to remote domain
Not true. It simply means that the remote system would have to implement VERP when qmail-remote tells the smtpd that the envelope sender is list-@[]@host.example.com. Unfortunately, qmail-remote and VERP-compatible smtp servers do not cooperate in that manner. All this talk of delivery optimization and VERP actually raises a few question for me: 1. Is there a seperate instance of qmail-remote for each bcc: header? 2. If so, how does one message with many recipients save memory or run faster? Wouldn't there be an identical number of messages in memory as sending many messages with one recipient? I'm assuming the answer is no, otherwise it wouldn't be recommended, right? 4. Does the existing qmail-verh patch work on the body of the message? The archives suggest that this would be VERB, not VERP or VERH. 5. If qmail-verh won't do replacements on the body, did anyone ever write a qmail-verb patch? 6. Does implementing VERB or VERH negate the benefits of 1 message, many recipients? Lyris and L-soft both claim that their mtas are better (faster) because they will do domain batching. If they are not misleading the masses, has anyone thought of ways (or developed patches) to implement this behavior in qmail? Russ? Perhaps this is all misguided conversation, but it seems to me that most of the threads on the list fall into 1 of 2 categories: 1. Qmail doesn't work (read as I broke it * ). 2. How can I get ___ to work better? (Expect What problem are you trying to solve?) What are people's thoughts? Feel free to respond off-list if you feel this is off-topic. I am thinking of assembling a document containing (founded upon) the best advice from the gurus, because these sorts of issues so often make it to the list (and past the archives). --joshua. *often: I broke it, but am so used to paying too much for crappy software, that I naturally assume that something is wrong with the program.
Re: rpm
mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: anyone have any luck with the qmail rpm? Bruce's source RPM? Yes, it works well. have a box I just want to get up and running fast. It's probably just as fast to download ucspi-tcp, daemontools, and the qmail source and do a Life with qmail install if you're already familiar with qmail. 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. ---
RE: many mails
Roger Walker writes: Here is my, possibly similar, situation: We have approximately 650,000 customers/accounts and Marketing wants to send them a monthly newsletter. Our mail system is Intermail running on some 25-30 Sun Enterprise Servers (and there is no chance of it being replaced with QMAIL). If you were running qmail, you could run ten times as many users on the same hardware. This I know experientially because one of my customers is doing just that. -- -russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | John Hartford, RIP Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
RE: rpm
Mick, check http://www.quint.be/projects/ the rpm's are there with a small howto Willy De la Court Quint NS NV On Monday, June 11, 2001 22:40, mick [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: anyone have any luck with the qmail rpm? have a box I just want to get up and running fast. * Mick Dobra Systems Administrator MTCO Communications 1-800-859-6826 *
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
Charles Cazabon writes: Good clarification. Would you settle for Making VERP work with per-MX batched recipients of a message would require extensive core changes to qmail? No. VERP support has little to do with it. The problem is that qmail-send / qmail-rspawn are strongly oriented around one recipient per invocation of qmail-remote. VERP just makes it slightly more complicated. qmail-send and qmail-rspawn could offer qmail-remote a list of recipients for the same message at the same host[1], and qmuail-remote could decide if VERP support from the SMTP client was needed. If it wasn't present then qmail-remote could *still* re-use the TCP connection. Given the state of the art in TCP/IP stacks, this would be a good thing because TCP retry timers are not shared between TCP sessions. [1] I'm not talking about per-MX, but instead per-host. Collating by MX entry means a gratuitious MX lookup (admittedly, probably cached). Instead, I'm just talking about a textual comparison between hostnames. -- -russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | John Hartford, RIP Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
Peter van Dijk writes: qmail-remote would have to start saying EHLO ofcourse, in that case. Is VERP a registered EHLO tag? I'm sure it isn't. -- -russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | John Hartford, RIP Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:00:42PM -0400, Joshua Nichols wrote: Not true. It simply means that the remote system would have to implement VERP when qmail-remote tells the smtpd that the envelope sender is list-@[]@host.example.com. Unfortunately, qmail-remote and VERP-compatible smtp servers do not cooperate in that manner. All this talk of delivery optimization and VERP actually raises a few question for me: 1. Is there a seperate instance of qmail-remote for each bcc: header? There is a separate instance of qmail-remote for every recipient. If a recipient is named twice, that counts as two recipients. 2. If so, how does one message with many recipients save memory or run faster? Wouldn't there be an identical number of messages in memory as sending many messages with one recipient? I'm assuming the answer is no, otherwise it wouldn't be recommended, right? The message only enters the queue once, from which point on qmail only has to flag a recipient when a message is sent. If you send lots of separate identical messages each with one recipient, these all have to go into the queue, chewing up diskspace and disk bandwidth. qmail is very good at spewing out one message lots of times. That's why it rocks for mailinglists :) 6. Does implementing VERB or VERH negate the benefits of 1 message, many recipients? No. The patches exist explicitly to allow some extra flexibility while keeping that benefit. Lyris and L-soft both claim that their mtas are better (faster) because they will do domain batching. If they are not misleading the masses, has anyone thought of ways (or developed patches) to implement this behavior in qmail? Russ? They are misleading the masses. Perhaps this is all misguided conversation, but it seems to me that most of the threads on the list fall into 1 of 2 categories: 1. Qmail doesn't work (read as I broke it * ). 2. How can I get ___ to work better? (Expect What problem are you trying to solve?) Might be quite a correct observation :) What are people's thoughts? Feel free to respond off-list if you feel this is off-topic. I am thinking of assembling a document containing (founded upon) the best advice from the gurus, because these sorts of issues so often make it to the list (and past the archives). This is ofcourse good, but check the archives. Several FAQ-like pages already exists. www.qmail.org links to most of m. Greetz, Peter -- Against Free Sex! http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html
RE: Multiple recipients to remote domain
Joshua Nichols writes: Not true. It simply means that the remote system would have to implement VERP when qmail-remote tells the smtpd that the envelope sender is list-@[]@host.example.com. Unfortunately, qmail-remote and VERP-compatible smtp servers do not cooperate in that manner. All this talk of delivery optimization and VERP actually raises a few question for me: 1. Is there a seperate instance of qmail-remote for each bcc: header? There is a separate instance of qmail-remote for every recipient regardless of how the recipient got to qmail-queue (and yes, bcc: is one of the ways). 2. If so, how does one message with many recipients save memory or run faster? It saves a HUGE amount of disk space and disk bandwidth. Otherwise, each recipient gets its own copy of the message body. 4. Does the existing qmail-verh patch work on the body of the message? The archives suggest that this would be VERB, not VERP or VERH. No, it doesn't modify the body. What if a message contained '#'? 5. If qmail-verh won't do replacements on the body, did anyone ever write a qmail-verb patch? I did, but it's not freely copyable, and I charge mucho dinero to install it. 6. Does implementing VERB or VERH negate the benefits of 1 message, many recipients? No, because the per-recipient substitution is done inside qmail-remote. Lyris and L-soft both claim that their mtas are better (faster) because they will do domain batching. If they are not misleading the masses, has anyone thought of ways (or developed patches) to implement this behavior in qmail? Russ? Dan has said that qmail has been measured to be faster and use less bandwidth than sendmail's implementation of the same idea. I don't know if Lyris and L-soft have better implementations than sendmail. Changing qmail to do this kind of batching would be a significant change. I hope that qmail 2 will address this problem. Whether it's a real problem or not, it's certainly a marketing problem. And it doesn't matter if you've got the world's most secure software if people have reasons to not use it. Perhaps this is all misguided conversation, but it seems to me that most of the threads on the list fall into 1 of 2 categories: 1. Qmail doesn't work (read as I broke it * ). 2. How can I get ___ to work better? (Expect What problem are you trying to solve?) :-) -- -russ nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://russnelson.com Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | John Hartford, RIP Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX |
Suspending an POP3 account.
Hi, I'd like to be able to suspend a POP3 account without changing the client's password. Is there anything I can do to the home directory or Maildir to accomplish this? What I'm doing the for incoming mail is a simple .qmail file that creates a message and spits back an error saying the account is suspended (sort of like a vacation program). So I want to make sure the .qmail is usable but also prevent the client from logging in via POP3. I've attempted changing the ownership of the Maildir to someone else, but that didn't work and only defered incoming messages. Most likely I'll have to store password somewhere and replace it in the shadow file with a 'x' when suspended, and put the crypt password back once the account is restored. I think this advice might come in handy for someone handling delinquent (lack of payment) clients when using a passwd/shadow authentication method. Any ideas on a solution? -reid
Re: QMAILQUEUE patch for qmail-1.03
I vote to leave it alone. Let the configuring individual invoke
/bin/sh in QMAILQUEUE herself if she understands and still wants to
make that particular convenience vs. overhead tradeoff.
Valued at $0.02,
JS
On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 10:26:28PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote:
I've been contemplating rewriting the patch to do an exec of
{ /bin/sh, -c, $QMAILQUEUE } instead of exec'ing $QMAILQUEUE as-is.
This would allow for putting the contents of the script named by
$QMAILQUEUE (which is frequently a one-line shell script anyways) into
the variable itself. Are there any downsides to this approach other
than the obvious overhead of adding /bin/sh to the execution path? Is
this overhead significant enough to make such a modification a bad idea?
--
Bruce Guenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://em.ca/~bruceg/ http://untroubled.org/
OpenPGP key: 699980E8 / D0B7 C8DD 365D A395 29DA 2E2A E96F B2DC 6999 80E8
Re: newbie question (it's an easy one i'm sure, but it's not in theFAQ)
David Talkington wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- John Wolford wrote: qmail is running. Nope, not quite ... If i check the ps listing, i see, in part: [root@homer init.d]# ps -ef |grep qmail root 29806 29805 1 Jun01 ?02:43:31 supervise qmail-pop3d root 29808 29805 0 Jun01 ?00:00:00 supervise qmail-send root 29810 29805 1 Jun01 ?02:55:05 supervise qmail-smtpd That means svscan knows about it, but hasn't been told to start it. I don't know Thing One about the Mandrake rpm, so you may have an init script which does this, but what you specifically need to do is this (assuming here for the sake of argument that svscan uses /service as its working directory): # svc -u /service/qmail-* Then your ps should tell a very different story. Good luck -d - -- David Talkington http://www.spotnet.org In the case that you do already have an instance of tcpserver running under your supervise (`pstree` command could be very helpful in determining that =) ) instance, you probably do not have the appropriate IP addresses allowed within tcpserver's rules. Usually this is placed in /etc/tcp.smtp and then built into a binary database which can be used by tcpserver; but if its not (and I am also unfamiliar with the structure used by these RPMs) you will have to find the script that supervise is attempting to execute and give it a glance over to determine the location of this file. -- Nick (Keith) Fish Network Engineer Triton Technologies, Inc.
Re: qpop3-d: connects but doesn´t gives OK
Pablo Martín wrote: Help! We have a system running bruce´s patched qmail and AVP. It has 400 accounts. It has been running ok for 2 months, but now sometimes pop-3d doesn´t work. I can telnet localhost 110, it greets me but it doesn´t says OK. Sometimes I restart it with the supervise scripts and all returns to normallity, but sometimes it needs a reboot. Any ideas? Thanks from Argentina Whenever I hear sporadic behavior like this, my first instinct is to blame hardware; but I'm a die-hard *NIX fan so it's not always the case. Anyways, I would recommend checking through your system for descrepencies. Usually what I do to check for this is grab the latest stable release of GCC and compile away (with `make -j [number of CPUs] bootstrap`). If I get any SegFaults or the like, I dig into the matter more using the checklist at http://www.BitWizard.nl/sig11/ . Do it late at night, though, and you won't have as many angry customers in the event you do manage to crash your system. It's tedious; but it works. =) -- Nick (Keith) Fish Network Engineer Triton Technologies, Inc.
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 12:09:40PM -0600, Roger Walker wrote: Thanks, Peter and Charles. Looks like I'll have to script a solution that telnets to port 25 on the remote host and issues 10,000+ (650,000+ actually) rcpt to: lines. You can also use qmail-remote manually to do this. -- Bruce Guenter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://em.ca/~bruceg/ http://untroubled.org/ OpenPGP key: 699980E8 / D0B7 C8DD 365D A395 29DA 2E2A E96F B2DC 6999 80E8 PGP signature
Re: qmail-inject and Qmail-scanner on local message
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 11:24:49AM -0700, John McCoy, Jr. wrote: Our web mail (IMP 2.2.4) program injects all mail using qmail-inject, when the email is totally local (i.e. never travels through SMTP) it is never scanned. I've tried adding the QMAILQUEUE variable into Apache to try to trigger the scan but I think it is to far down the loop. Any one have any ideas on this, I am using the qmailqueue.patch maybe if I replaced qmail-queue instead? Well replacing qmail-queue with Q-S would certainly fix that particular problem, but it does sound like it's just an environment variable issue. What does IMP call? As far as I remember - it calls /usr/sbin/sendmail. That is a link to the Qmail version I assume? Try calling it from a shell with QMAILQUEUE set accordingly - does Q-S get invoked? If not, strace/truss it as root and see what happens... -- Cheers Jason Haar Unix/Special Projects, Trimble NZ Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
Re: Suspending an POP3 account.
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:58:19PM -0400, Reid Sutherland allegedly wrote: Hi, I'd like to be able to suspend a POP3 account without changing the client's password. Is there anything I can do to the home directory or Maildir to accomplish this? What I'm doing the for incoming mail is a simple .qmail file that creates a message and spits back an error saying the account is suspended (sort of like a vacation program). So I want to make sure the .qmail is usable but also prevent the client from logging in via POP3. I've attempted changing the ownership of the Maildir to someone else, but that didn't work and only defered incoming messages. Do you still want incoming mail delivered for such accounts? If so, the easiest thing to do is change the name of Maildir to, say, Maildir.suspended and then in the .qmail file go: ./Maildir.suspended/ | bouncesaying Account suspended When they become active again, remove the .qmail file and rename Maildir.suspended back to Maildir. Don't forget the chmod +t $HOME to defer any deliveries while you are making these changes. If you do not want the incoming mail delivered, then a permission change plus a .qmail file that only generates a bounce message is fine. Mind you, the POP error message they get wont be very friendly and maybe that's the intent. If it's not, you could additionally create a hand-crafted Maildir that has just one message in it regarding the suspension. Regards.
Qmail Admin
How come the admin tool does not compile? Here is the following: Also here is the ./configscript ./configure --enable-vpopuser=vpopmail --enable-cgibindir=/apache/cgi-bin -- enable-htmldir=/usr/local/share --enable-vpopmaildir=/home/vpopmail/ #make make all-recursive make[1]: Entering directory `/installers/qmailadmin-0.45' make[2]: Entering directory `/installers/qmailadmin-0.45' gcc -I. -g -O2 -c qmailadmin.c qmailadmin.c:30: vpopmail.h: No such file or directory qmailadmin.c:31: vauth.h: No such file or directory make[2]: *** [qmailadmin.o] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/installers/qmailadmin-0.45' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/installers/qmailadmin-0.45' make: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 == Mike Jimenez System Administrator Visual Perspectives Internet, Inc. (VPI.Net) Tel: (949) 595-8622 -- Fax: (949) 595-8629 http://www.vpi.net ==
Hahaha (hybris) clobber perl script...
Hello all...
I finally got deeply disturbed about all the double-bounces coming into my
email box (sometimes 2500 after a weekend... :-( ) from the Hybris virus
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and I figured I needed to create a personal filter
for my mailbox to filter these thingies out... So I did.
The proggie is simple (and included here) but most everything's hardcoded
into the program, so you'll need to modify it to suit yourself ( salt to
taste... ;-)
It's a *very* short Perl script, named (on my machine) killhahaha.pl, and
here's what my .qmail file reads:
|/home/zmerch/killhahaha.pl
./Maildir/
and here's the script:
#!/usr/local/bin/perl
### Let's get the info first, to see if it's actually something
### we need to control...
@zline = STDIN;
$limpy = grep (/TVqQAAME/, @zline);
exit (0) if ($limpy == 0);
# Now, we know that we have a virus... send it to a separate file
# have the proggie die quietly while disregarding further delivery
# instructions in the .qmail file...
open (Q,/home/zmerch/hahainfo.txt);
# go thru each environment variable and write them to my logfile...
foreach $quack ( keys(%ENV) ) {
print Q ENV - $quack = $ENV{$quack}\n;
}
print Q \n\n;
foreach $liner (@zline) {
# re-search for the beginning of the virus, because we don't
# need to save the entire virus payload to our data file...
$limpy = grep (/TVqQAAME/, $liner);
last if ($limpy != 0);
print Q OMail: $liner;
}
print Q \n=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\n\n;
# Now exit the proggie exit w/a #99 exit code to make
# qmail disregard any further lines in the .qmail file
close (Q);
exit (99);
Anyway, I hope this helps someone out there...
Thanks,
Roger Merch Merchberger
--
Roger Merch Merchberger --- sysadmin, Iceberg Computers
Recycling is good, right??? Ok, so I'll recycle an old .sig.
If at first you don't succeed, nuclear warhead
disarmament should *not* be your first career choice.
RE: Suspending an POP3 account.
(lack of payment) clients when using a passwd/shadow authentication method. Any ideas on a solution? Though different checkpassword and pop programs will handle the problem differently, changing the _permissions_ on the ~Maildir/* so the owner doesn't have read access will work. That is, typical Maildir perms are 700, change it to 300. All mail will be delivered as usual, but the pop account will not work. If the user has telnet access, they will be able to circumvent this, but in a situation where you have expiring pop accounts, I'm assuming they don't. I imagine you could easily set the return error so that the user's mta tells them they're delinquent. It's not everyday the problem is a permission denied read on the Maildir. --joshua.
Re: Multiple recipients to remote domain
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:12:44PM -0600, Bruce Guenter allegedly wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 12:09:40PM -0600, Roger Walker wrote: Thanks, Peter and Charles. Looks like I'll have to script a solution that telnets to port 25 on the remote host and issues 10,000+ (650,000+ actually) rcpt to: lines. You can also use qmail-remote manually to do this. And Net::SMTP from your local CPAN makes life pretty easy if you want to have a more programmatic interface. Regards.
Re: Suspending an POP3 account.
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:58:19PM -0400, Reid Sutherland allegedly wrote: Hi, I'd like to be able to suspend a POP3 account without changing the client's password. Is there anything I can do to the home directory or Maildir to accomplish this? What I'm doing the for incoming mail is a simple .qmail file that creates a message and spits back an error saying the account is suspended (sort of like a vacation program). So I want to make sure the .qmail is usable but also prevent the client from logging in via POP3. I've attempted changing the ownership of the Maildir to someone else, but that didn't work and only defered incoming messages. Do you still want incoming mail delivered for such accounts? No. It's as if the account is dead, but the username is kept active. I've already created a .qmail that produces a bounce. If so, the easiest thing to do is change the name of Maildir to, say, Maildir.suspended and then in the .qmail file go: ./Maildir.suspended/ | bouncesaying Account suspended When they become active again, remove the .qmail file and rename Maildir.suspended back to Maildir. Don't forget the chmod +t $HOME to defer any deliveries while you are making these changes. If you do not want the incoming mail delivered, then a permission change plus a .qmail file that only generates a bounce message is fine. Mind you, the POP error message they get wont be very friendly and maybe that's the intent. If it's not, you could additionally create a hand-crafted Maildir that has just one message in it regarding the suspension. I've attempted a permission change on the Maildir, but then it won't run the program in the .qmail file. So to sum this up, I want to prevent both POP3 login and SMTP delivery, and I've already done the SMTP prevention. -reid
Re: Suspending an POP3 account.
Reid Sutherland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] Most likely I'll have to store password somewhere and replace it in the shadow file with a 'x' when suspended, and put the crypt password back once the account is restored. Not qmail related, but a trick I like to use is to just prepend *LOCK* to their crypted password entry. Then to restore the account and put the correct crypted password back, you just remove *LOCK*. For example, if I have sgifford:abc12345: in /etc/shadow, it becomes sgifford:*LOCK*abc12345: That solves the problem of where to put the password, but maybe there is a more elegant qmail-based solution. Good luck, -ScottG.
Re: Suspending an POP3 account.
Reid Sutherland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] Most likely I'll have to store password somewhere and replace it in the shadow file with a 'x' when suspended, and put the crypt password back once the account is restored. Not qmail related, but a trick I like to use is to just prepend *LOCK* to their crypted password entry. Then to restore the account and put the correct crypted password back, you just remove *LOCK*. For example, if I have sgifford:abc12345: in /etc/shadow, it becomes sgifford:*LOCK*abc12345: That solves the problem of where to put the password, but maybe there is a more elegant qmail-based solution. Good call, this is the most viable solution so far. I think it's the best way IMHO. -reid
Re: Suspending an POP3 account.
(lack of payment) clients when using a passwd/shadow authentication method. Any ideas on a solution? Though different checkpassword and pop programs will handle the problem differently, changing the _permissions_ on the ~Maildir/* so the owner doesn't have read access will work. That is, typical Maildir perms are 700, change it to 300. All mail will be delivered as usual, but the pop account will not work. If the user has telnet access, they will be able to circumvent this, but in a situation where you have expiring pop accounts, I'm assuming they don't. I imagine you could easily set the return error so that the user's mta tells them they're delinquent. It's not everyday the problem is a permission denied read on the Maildir. This sounds really good too. This will give them a more descriptive error instead of password error as suggested before. A password error will often simply mean that and end up confusing the client in most cases. But a permission denied error could result in them thinking, 'Hey, maybe I should pay my bill on time next time'. Thanks for the tip. -reid
Re: Suspending an POP3 account.
I've attempted a permission change on the Maildir, but then it won't run the program in the .qmail file. That's not how it works. There must be something else you've done. Did you change the permissions on the home directory as well? How about the .qmail file? Show us the exact error message in the log that tells you that it won't run the program in the .qmail file. Also, show us the contents and permission of the .qmail file. Regards.
Re: Suspending an POP3 account.
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Reid Sutherland wrote: For example, if I have sgifford:abc12345: in /etc/shadow, it becomes sgifford:*LOCK*abc12345: That solves the problem of where to put the password, but maybe there is a more elegant qmail-based solution. Good call, this is the most viable solution so far. I think it's the best way IMHO. Didn't you all ever read the manpage for passwd? From the refered manpage: Account maintenance User accounts may be locked and unlocked with the -l and -u flags. The -l option disables an account by changing the password to a value which matches no possible encrypted value. The -u option re-enables an account by changing the password back to its previous value. The account status may be given with the -S option. The status information consists of 6 parts. The first part indicates if the user account is locked (L), has no pass- word (NP), or has a usable password (P). The second part gives the date of the last password change. The next four parts are the minimum age, maximum age, warning period, and inactivity period for the password. Just a classic case of RTFM. -- Antonio Dias
Re: Suspending an POP3 account.
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 12:36:48AM -0300, Antonio Dias wrote: Just a classic case of RTFM. Yeah, and you better read very closely too, because these commands don't work across all platforms. (Case in point, solaris 8 doesn't support passwd -u) --Adam
