Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-17 Thread Always Learning
On Mon, 2014-11-17 at 08:55 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: On Sunday, November 16, 2014 12:21 AM, Always Learning wrote: Writing as a humble programmer, why don't you and Les write your own database application (using HTML, CSS, PHP and MariaDB (MySQL)) and store the important parts (or

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-17 Thread John R. Dennison
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 02:48:52PM +, Always Learning wrote: Noise removed. Is it too much to ask for that this thread, if not the list as a whole, return to being CentOS specific? John -- IRC - Where men are men, women are men and

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-16 Thread Christopher Chan
On Sunday, November 16, 2014 12:21 AM, Always Learning wrote: On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 11:50 -1000, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata wrote: I could do that I suppose, but I haven't and probably wouldn't have the time necessary to separate out the emails between the two accounts. I already have 6+ email

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-15 Thread Always Learning
On Fri, 2014-11-14 at 11:50 -1000, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata wrote: I could do that I suppose, but I haven't and probably wouldn't have the time necessary to separate out the emails between the two accounts. I already have 6+ email accounts that I have to monitor so I'd rather not fork off

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-15 Thread Les Mikesell
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Always Learning cen...@u62.u22.net wrote: Why keep masses and masses of irrelevant data in an unstructured format presided over by Google? Its not logical sense. Essentially, why store a lot of rubbish that will never ever be needed ? Email is inherently

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-15 Thread Miranda Hawarden-Ogata
On 2014/11/15 08:28, Les Mikesell wrote: On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Always Learning cen...@u62.u22.net wrote: Why keep masses and masses of irrelevant data in an unstructured format presided over by Google? Its not logical sense. Essentially, why store a lot of rubbish that will never

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-15 Thread Karanbir Singh
On 14/11/14 18:09, Les Mikesell wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:07 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: So in practice I think this really boils down to the common problem of ancient software shipped by RHEL and the bug-for-bug compatibility in CentOS with the list system eating

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-15 Thread Peter
On 11/16/2014 11:11 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote: 2) what is the lists.centos.org machine doing with DKIM and what is the larger fix for each of those things. Did you get the off-list email I sent a couple days ago irt this? Peter ___ CentOS mailing

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-15 Thread Les Mikesell
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: On 14/11/14 18:09, Les Mikesell wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:07 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: So in practice I think this really boils down to the common problem of ancient software shipped by

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-15 Thread Karanbir Singh
On 15/11/14 23:09, Les Mikesell wrote: The point is that mailman has the fix. I suppose you can look at the question of whether you solve the problem only for yourself or for all centos users as two different things but the solution is pretty much the same as any other bug that has been

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-15 Thread Peter
On 11/16/2014 12:09 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: The point is that mailman has the fix. I suppose you can look at the question of whether you solve the problem only for yourself or for all centos users as two different things but the solution is pretty much the same as any other bug that has been

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-15 Thread John R Pierce
On 11/15/2014 5:17 PM, Peter wrote: I think it's important to note that this actually isn't a bug. This is failure to strip DKIM headers when forwarding a message. Note that when RHEL6 was released DKIM was still new and DMARC was pretty much unheard of. It's not surprising that the version

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-15 Thread Peter
On 11/16/2014 02:45 PM, John R Pierce wrote: the other important feature the new mailman has is to munge the From: field if the user's DNS has the DMARC records indicating a draconian policy. Grrr, yes, of course, DMARC likes to check the From: header now (utterly stupid). Anyways, it should

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Alexander Farber
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Kai Schaetzl mailli...@conactive.com wrote: That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's wrong at all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out loud to the list to put social pressure on him. No, actually it's more like you have to

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Karanbir Singh
On 11/12/2014 07:19 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net wrote: Once upon a time, Kai Schaetzl mailli...@conactive.com said: Well, *yes*. It's not business to be carried out on the list nor does the guy who moans about it seem to know why. And

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Darr247
On 14 November 2014 @05:34 zulu, Les Mikesell wrote: Just guessing, but it may be that you are using POP to retrieve the mail and getting an uncategorized view of new messages in the inbox, where if you use IMAP (with the possibility of syncing to multiple systems), gmail's labels are mapped to

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Les Mikesell
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Darr247 darr...@gmail.com wrote: You may be onto something, because I *am* using IMAP (TB's default during account setup) instead of POP3. I'll be looking around in gmail next to see if there's some way to pre-sort mail from centos.org (as Miranda implied)

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Les Mikesell
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:07 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: So in practice I think this really boils down to the common problem of ancient software shipped by RHEL and the bug-for-bug compatibility in CentOS with the list system eating its own dog food. That is, there is a

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Darr247
On 14 November 2014 @17:52 zulu, Les Mikesell wrote: Given that you can use thunderbird on windows Ah, but I also use it on CentOS... I just don't post as much from that copy. The point of that is to have at least 2 offline sources to my list subscriptions, since if the problem is with the

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Les Mikesell
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Darr247 darr...@gmail.com wrote: Ah, but I also use it on CentOS... I just don't post as much from that copy. The point of that is to have at least 2 offline sources to my list subscriptions, since if the problem is with the network, having them all available

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Miranda Hawarden-Ogata
On 2014/11/14 05:32, Darr247 wrote: On 14 November 2014 @05:34 zulu, Les Mikesell wrote: Just guessing, but it may be that you are using POP to retrieve the mail and getting an uncategorized view of new messages in the inbox, where if you use IMAP (with the possibility of syncing to multiple

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Les Mikesell
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata hawar...@ifa.hawaii.edu wrote: Matches: to:(centos@centos.org) Do this: Skip Inbox, Mark as read, Apply label Lists/centos, Never send it to Spam If you auto-mark as read, how do you ever know when it really is read? -- Les Mikesell

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Miranda Hawarden-Ogata
On 2014/11/14 10:38, Les Mikesell wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata hawar...@ifa.hawaii.edu wrote: Matches: to:(centos@centos.org) Do this: Skip Inbox, Mark as read, Apply label Lists/centos, Never send it to Spam If you auto-mark as read, how do you ever know when

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Les Mikesell
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata hawar...@ifa.hawaii.edu wrote: If you auto-mark as read, how do you ever know when it really is read? I don't use the gmail interface for day-to-day email processing, for precisely that reason. It is why I resort to TB. I don't get it.

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-14 Thread Miranda Hawarden-Ogata
On 2014/11/14 11:32, Les Mikesell wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata hawar...@ifa.hawaii.edu wrote: If you auto-mark as read, how do you ever know when it really is read? I don't use the gmail interface for day-to-day email processing, for precisely that reason. It

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-13 Thread Elias Persson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2014-11-12 22:11, Les Mikesell wrote: It's not my problem, it is what his domain says should be done with mail claiming to be from there but isn't.. Your mail system may simply ignore the request, but that doesn't mean it always will or that

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-13 Thread Les Mikesell
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Elias Persson delre...@takeit.se wrote: Presumably you've already got a filter set up for applying a label to list mails. Simply check the Never mark as spam box and those mails will no longer be misplaced. I don't bother defining filters for gmail. It is

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-13 Thread Valeri Galtsev
On Thu, November 13, 2014 8:53 am, Elias Persson wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2014-11-12 22:11, Les Mikesell wrote: It's not my problem, it is what his domain says should be done with mail claiming to be from there but isn't.. Your mail system may simply ignore

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-13 Thread Les Mikesell
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Valeri Galtsev galt...@kicp.uchicago.edu wrote: I would second that. In general, it is rather discouraging to hear: hey, fix that thing on your side. Of course, I can make your mail not go into my spambox on my side, but I don't care to change anything on my

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-13 Thread James B. Byrne
On Wed, November 12, 2014 15:50, g wrote: On 11/12/2014 10:13 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: Well, no. Per the headers: Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: centos-boun...@centos.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=centos-boun...@centos.org;

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-13 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Valeri Galtsev galt...@kicp.uchicago.edu said: I would second that. In general, it is rather discouraging to hear: hey, fix that thing on your side. Of course, I can make your mail not go into my spambox on my side, but I don't care to change anything on my side. The problem

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-13 Thread Darr247
On 13 November 2014 @14:53 zulu, Elias Persson wrote: Presumably you've already got a filter set up for applying a label to list mails. Actually, on those 'dmarc=fail (p=REJECT/p=QUARANTINE' emails, Thunderbird ignores the filter that moves this list's emails into the local folder I have

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-13 Thread Les Mikesell
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Darr247 darr...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 November 2014 @14:53 zulu, Elias Persson wrote: Presumably you've already got a filter set up for applying a label to list mails. Actually, on those 'dmarc=fail (p=REJECT/p=QUARANTINE' emails, Thunderbird ignores the

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-13 Thread Darr247
On 13 November 2014 @21:51 zulu, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata wrote: Have you tried setting up the TB filter to mark as not-junk when it runs? Mine are set to apply before junk classification matching on to/from/cc/bcc contains centos@centos.org and then the actions are move to folder, set junk to

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-13 Thread Miranda Hawarden-Ogata
On 2014/11/13 12:43, Darr247 wrote: On 13 November 2014 @21:51 zulu, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata wrote: Have you tried setting up the TB filter to mark as not-junk when it runs? Mine are set to apply before junk classification matching on to/from/cc/bcc contains centos@centos.org and then the

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-13 Thread Les Mikesell
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Miranda Hawarden-Ogata hawar...@ifa.hawaii.edu wrote: 3) I do not have any mailing list messages deposited in my spam boxes and do not have any /dev/null redirects either in gmail or in TB (and never will. I'm a sysad, therefore the word paranoid cannot be

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Kai Schaetzl
That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's wrong at all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out loud to the list to put social pressure on him. Please move this to private mail and understand that Gmail is *not* what rules email best practice and also try to

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Valeri Galtsev
On Wed, November 12, 2014 9:46 am, Kai Schaetzl wrote: That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's wrong at all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out loud to the list to put social pressure on him. Please move this to private mail and understand that Gmail

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Les Mikesell
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Kai Schaetzl mailli...@conactive.com wrote: That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's wrong at all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out loud to the list to put social pressure on him. Well, no. Per the headers:

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Les Mikesell
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Kai Schaetzl mailli...@conactive.com wrote: That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's wrong at all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out loud to the

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Kai Schaetzl
Les Mikesell wrote on Wed, 12 Nov 2014 10:13:07 -0600: Well, no. Well, *yes*. It's not business to be carried out on the list nor does the guy who moans about it seem to know why. And if you are the second from Gmail then please move it off-list as well. It's really not anyone's problem on

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Les Mikesell
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kai Schaetzl mailli...@conactive.com wrote: Les Mikesell wrote on Wed, 12 Nov 2014 10:13:07 -0600: Well, no. Well, *yes*. It's not business to be carried out on the list nor does the guy who moans about it seem to know why. And if you are the second from

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Kai Schaetzl mailli...@conactive.com said: Well, *yes*. It's not business to be carried out on the list nor does the guy who moans about it seem to know why. And if you are the second from Gmail then please move it off-list as well. It's really not anyone's problem on this

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Les Mikesell
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net wrote: Once upon a time, Kai Schaetzl mailli...@conactive.com said: Well, *yes*. It's not business to be carried out on the list nor does the guy who moans about it seem to know why. And if you are the second from Gmail then

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread g
On 11/12/2014 10:13 AM, Les Mikesell wrote: On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Kai Schaetzl mailli...@conactive.com wrote: That's ridiculous, you don't even know what's wrong or if it's wrong at all or what you want him to do but you have to cry it out loud to the list to put social pressure

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Les Mikesell
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 2:50 PM, g gel...@bellsouth.net wrote: Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: centos-boun...@centos.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=centos-boun...@centos.org; dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@;

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Darr247
On 12 November 2014 @20:50 zulu, g wrote: i believe problems are on your end, and not with server for James. i do not see dmarc=fail or p=QUARANTINE in *any* of his email headers. I think you're not seeing the full headers, then. e.g. most of the headers of a recent message in here from

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Les Mikesell
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Darr247 darr...@gmail.com wrote: On 12 November 2014 @20:50 zulu, g wrote: i believe problems are on your end, and not with server for James. i do not see dmarc=fail or p=QUARANTINE in *any* of his email headers. I think you're not seeing the full headers,

Re: [CentOS] Not To James B. Byrne

2014-11-12 Thread Darr247
On 12 November 2014 @22:47 zulu, Darr247 wrote: On 12 November 2014 @20:50 zulu, g wrote: i believe problems are on your end, and not with server for James. i do not see dmarc=fail or p=QUARANTINE in *any* of his email headers. I think you're not seeing the full headers, then. e.g. most of