Hi Julien, Martin, others,
On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 07:56:27PM +0300, Marko Mäkelä wrote:
> Hi Julien,
>
> Sorry, I do not remember receiving your message from June 20.
> Good that you followed up.
Sorry, it must be something with my spam filter or the mail server.
I did not receive any of the fo
On Sat, 12. Aug 2006, 11:39:06 +0200, Julien Louis wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 10:30:26AM +0200, Julien Louis wrote:
> > Well, i didn't have the time to test the patch, i'll try to test it this
> > weekend
>
> I've just tested your patch and it works fine, i can get server infos when i
> ru
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 10:30:26AM +0200, Julien Louis wrote:
> Well, i didn't have the time to test the patch, i'll try to test it this
> weekend
I've just tested your patch and it works fine, i can get server infos when i run
msmtp -a testaccount -S.
--
I do desire we may be better strangers.
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 09:55:20AM +0200, Martin Lambers wrote:
>
> Is there still interest in this problem and in the patch?
> I will prepare a new release soon and would like to know if I should
> include this patch (or a similar one).
Well, i didn't have the time to test the patch, i'll try to
On Sun, 16. Jul 2006, 21:24:56 +0200, Martin Lambers wrote:
> I finally found the time to write a patch that adds a tls_sslv3only
> command (and --tls-sslv3only option).
>
> Do you agree with the patch? Any suggestions for improvements?
Is there still interest in this problem and in the patch?
I
On Wed, 05. Jul 2006, 21:31:05 +0200, Julien Louis wrote:
> > Would it instead be possible to point the admins of the mail server in
> > question to the problem and kindly ask them to consider an upgrade?
>
> Sure, but i think he is not the only guy who have this bug.
And it should not be said th
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 09:31:01PM +0200, Martin Lambers wrote:
> What should we do about this? Is it really worth it to add a
> 'tls_disable_tlsv1' command or something similar to work around a buggy
> server that was already called "really ancient" in Dec. 2003?
I don't know, i think it can be i
On Mon, 03. Jul 2006, 20:50:10 +0200, Julien louis wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 03:04:08PM +0200, Martin Lambers wrote:
> > With the following line:
> > > > gnutls-cli -s -p 1025 your.mailserver.com
> > GnuTLS should be able to handshake with SSLv3 and TLSv1 hosts.
>
> > Similar, msmtp/GnuTL
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 03:04:08PM +0200, Martin Lambers wrote:
> With the following line:
> > > gnutls-cli -s -p 1025 your.mailserver.com
> GnuTLS should be able to handshake with SSLv3 and TLSv1 hosts.
> Similar, msmtp/GnuTLS should be able to handshake with a SSLv3 or TLSv1
> host because it
> > it seems gnutls can open a new encrypted connection on your server.
> > But it can't
> > do it with the TLS protocol, try the following commands:
> > gnutls-cli -s -p 1025 your.mailserver.com
> > at prompt enter the following command (one for each prompt):
> > EHLO example.com
> > STARTTLS
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 12:53:44AM +0200, Julien Louis wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 07:37:54PM +0300, Marko Mäkelä wrote:
> > Indeed, replacing --with-ssl=gnutls in DEB_CONFIGURE_EXTRA_FLAGS
> > with --with-ssl=openssl does the trick. I hope you can find out
> > what gnutls is doing differentl
On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 07:37:54PM +0300, Marko Mäkelä wrote:
> Indeed, replacing --with-ssl=gnutls in DEB_CONFIGURE_EXTRA_FLAGS
> with --with-ssl=openssl does the trick. I hope you can find out
> what gnutls is doing differently from openssl.
it seems gnutls can open a new encrypted connection o
On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 01:44:24AM +0200, Julien Louis wrote:
> Did you try to rebuild against openssl, i've just rebuild against openssl
> and it seems to work.
Indeed, replacing --with-ssl=gnutls in DEB_CONFIGURE_EXTRA_FLAGS
with --with-ssl=openssl does the trick. I hope you can find out
what
On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 01:44:24AM +0200, Julien Louis wrote:
> > I remember reporting a similar bug against mutt a couple of years ago.
> > It wouldn't talk to imaps.hut.fi when linked against gnutls, but it
> > worked when linked against libssl (built myself from the source).
> > Some gnutls para
On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 07:56:27PM +0300, Marko Mäkelä wrote:
>
> Same problem with 1.4.6-2. Originally, I tried msmtp somewhere last
> October or November, and it didn't work with this server. That may
> have been because of a bug in the server at that time; it is running
> kind of beta test co
Hi Julien,
Sorry, I do not remember receiving your message from June 20.
Good that you followed up.
On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 06:05:05PM +0200, Julien Louis wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 10:19:23PM +0200, Julien Lousi wrote:
[snip]
> > > On msmtp 1.4.5-1, the line "220 begin TLS" is followed b
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 10:19:23PM +0200, Julien Lousi wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 11:42:33AM +0300, Marko Mäkelä wrote:
> > Package: msmtp
> > Version: 1.4.6-1
> > Severity: grave
> >
> > msmtp 1.4.6-1 refuses to initiate a STARTTLS connection to a server that
> > works fine with msmtp 1.4.5
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 11:42:33AM +0300, Marko Mäkelä wrote:
> Package: msmtp
> Version: 1.4.6-1
> Severity: grave
>
> msmtp 1.4.6-1 refuses to initiate a STARTTLS connection to a server that
> works fine with msmtp 1.4.5-1. Downgrading to 1.4.5-1 worked around the
> problem. Here's what happen
Package: msmtp
Version: 1.4.6-1
Severity: grave
msmtp 1.4.6-1 refuses to initiate a STARTTLS connection to a server that
works fine with msmtp 1.4.5-1. Downgrading to 1.4.5-1 worked around the
problem. Here's what happens on 1.4.6-1. I replaced the addresses with
example.com:
msmtp -d -C examp
19 matches
Mail list logo
