Simple question,
would it be possible to run mailman on one host, and the Postfix MTA on
another host?
The reason is that I'm configuring a new in/outgoing server that
eventually should take over the old one, the old should keep the web
server functionality, so I'd like to split things up.
If
On 8/29/06, Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eric Howland wrote:
I have used both DELIVERY_MODULE = 'Sendmail'
and
DELIVERY_MODULE = 'SMTPDirect'
This just shifts the directory in which the outgoing email is stuck.
SMTPDirect leaves them in the out directory
Sendmail leaves them in
Moin,
I recently took the administration of an mailinglist over.
It was quite a shock to find out that it had over 8000(!)
mails waiting in its moderation queue. The problem with this
is of course that the webinterface times out before giving
anything back and returns a 500 server internal error
On 8/30/06, Eric Howland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought I have another machine that can act as a mail server (and is
also running postfix) maybe I could get it to sent the mail. Since I
am running
DELIVERY_MODULE = 'SMTPDirect'
Are you sure that the machine in question is configured to
Spyro Polymiadis wrote:
maybe the answer to my own question
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=1020102group_id=103atid=300103
Can someone confirm if this is the correct fix for my problem?
It may or may not be. There were two different causes to this problem.
The first is
Anders Norrbring wrote:
Simple question,
would it be possible to run mailman on one host, and the Postfix MTA on
another host?
The reason is that I'm configuring a new in/outgoing server that
eventually should take over the old one, the old should keep the web
server functionality, so I'd
Patrick Bogen wrote:
On 8/30/06, Eric Howland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought I have another machine that can act as a mail server (and is
also running postfix) maybe I could get it to sent the mail. Since I
am running
DELIVERY_MODULE = 'SMTPDirect'
Are you sure that the machine in
Patrick Bogen wrote:
On 8/30/06, Attila Kinali [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've read about discard and that i can just delete everything
in the queue. But i'd rather like to go trough the list
and be able to aprove some of the held mails. Is there any
way i can work on the queue? Another
On 8/30/06, Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Patrick Bogen wrote:
On 8/30/06, Eric Howland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought I have another machine that can act as a mail server (and is
also running postfix) maybe I could get it to sent the mail. Since I
am running
DELIVERY_MODULE
On 8/30/06, Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anders Norrbring wrote:
Simple question,
would it be possible to run mailman on one host, and the Postfix MTA on
another host?
The reason is that I'm configuring a new in/outgoing server that
eventually should take over the old one, the old
Eric Howland skrev:
On 8/30/06, Mark Sapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anders Norrbring wrote:
Simple question,
would it be possible to run mailman on one host, and the Postfix MTA on
another host?
The reason is that I'm configuring a new in/outgoing server that
eventually should take over
Setup: Debian AMD64 (mix testing/stable), Exim 4.62, Mailman 2.1.8 from
source (with patch to allow @listname in allowed posters), multiple
installations of Mailman (one instance of MM per virtual domain)
In the last 24 hours we've had the same situation occur with two corporate
Friends,
We have a Fedora Core 2 box, which is our Mailman/Postfix server. A few
months ago, after a harddisk crash, I´ve tried to install Fedora Core 3
instead and restore Mailman configuration from the backup. It dind´t work at
all.
Now, I´ve decided to try it again, with Fedora 5 (or maybe
Elizabeth Schwartz said the following on 2006/08/30 08:12 PM:
I see how to allow them to post if they are *not* members of the list , but
not if they *are*.
We found the following useful for non-members (but members of another list):
Dragon said the following on 2006/08/30 10:03 PM:
Oops... forgot to send my reply to the list too. Sorry about that
Bretton, I did not mean for you to receive it twice.
Not a problem, and thanks for the reply ;-)
However it doesn't solve my problem of determining why a
TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED];
Bretton Vine sent the message below at 14:22 8/30/2006:
Dragon said the following on 2006/08/30 10:03 PM:
Oops... forgot to send my reply to the list too. Sorry about that
Bretton, I did not mean for you to receive it twice.
Not a problem, and thanks for the reply ;-)
However it doesn't solve
At 11:22 PM +0200 2006-08-30, Bretton Vine wrote:
(no criticism intended to developers, but I have to ask:)
Was this requested by users; were users involved in this decision; or was it
a case of developers deciding for users what they thought was best given the
environment of email/lists
At 2:37 PM +0200 2006-08-30, Attila Kinali wrote:
I've read about discard and that i can just delete everything
in the queue. But i'd rather like to go trough the list
and be able to aprove some of the held mails. Is there any
way i can work on the queue? Another possibility would be
if
At 8:12 PM +0200 2006-08-30, Bretton Vine wrote:
Now when I test the following I /don't/ get the error.
TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Which brings to mind an obvious possibility, but this being what it is that
isn't one that can be entertained. (heads must roll!
Bretton Vine wrote:
I repeat, no criticism intended, I just need to be able to give a complete
answer and am anticipating the questions I'll be asked. :-)
I think most of what I'm going to say here has been said by Dragon and
Brad already, but just for emphasis...
The major reason for
Dragon said the following on 2006/08/31 12:24 AM:
I just tested this on one of my lists. I sent an e-mail with the To: set
to one of my other e-mail addresses and the CC: set to my list address.
snip
It worked as advertised when I had it enabled.
I can confirm my own testing duplicates this.
Spyro Polymiadis wrote:
I ended up grabbing the 2.1.8 Privacy.py file and it seems to have fixed
the problem..
Good.
Mark out of interest, that last link you provided me with
gave me a:
An Exception Has Occurred
The root mailman is unknown. If you believe the value is
Brad Knowles said the following on 2006/08/31 12:09 AM:
snip useful comments
We prefer to have this option default to on, because it is safer that
way, and people can always choose to set their choice to be more
permissive.
(locally) it's been referred to as a be strict in what you send,
Mark Sapiro said the following on 2006/08/31 01:22 AM:
Whatever is chosen as the Defaults.py value for any particular list
setting, some will wish it had been the other way. It is simply not
possible to create out of the box defaults that will satisfy
everyone. That is why a site can change
Bretton Vine wrote:
Mark Sapiro said the following on 2006/08/31 01:22 AM:
Thus of your 3 examples above, if 'list' is the list posting address
that Mailman expects to see, only the 3rd example will be held for
implicit destination because in this and only this case, Mailman
doesn't see the
At 1:21 AM +0200 2006-08-31, Bretton Vine wrote:
As I said above, this should never have happened as far as I can tell.
I'm sure one of the developers with more knowledge about this will
correct me if I am wrong.
I'm hoping for more information so I can prepare a summary of the
At 2:07 AM +0200 2006-08-31, Bretton Vine wrote:
(locally) it's been referred to as a be strict in what you send, relaxed in
what you receive approach but not everyone adheres to (or is aware of) this
way of looking at things and it seems antiquated to some.
It's called the Postel
At 2:22 AM +0200 2006-08-31, Bretton Vine wrote:
Aaaah, but that's the crux of the situation. I have read the documentation.
I have searched the FAQs. I have asked the list and I keep getting the same
answer: there is no obvious reason a {TO:listname,CC:thirdparty} post should
result in
Brad Knowles said the following on 2006/08/31 02:37 AM:
So, does my opinion count?
Of course it does. Credentials are useful, experience more so. Heck next
week we have a whole bunch of experts here to give opinions to the industry
(shameless plug for iweek)
The person in question wouldn't
On 8/30/06 8:07 PM, Brad Knowles at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 2:22 AM +0200 2006-08-31, Bretton Vine wrote:
Aaaah, but that's the crux of the situation. I have read the documentation.
I have searched the FAQs. I have asked the list and I keep getting the same
answer: there is no
Mark Sapiro said the following on 2006/08/31 02:55 AM:
It drove me crazy, because I knew there was
a real explaination for every glitch, and I wanted to find it, but I
think the 'poltergeist' explaination worked for many of the users.
Yeah, the radial flux in the atmospheric pressure excuse
At 4:56 AM +0200 2006-08-31, Bretton Vine wrote:
So far my experience has been wonderful with the product, good and bad with
the documentation, and rather difficult in terms of user-error, namely mine.
I am of the opinion that all software sucks, but some sucks less than
others. IMO,
32 matches
Mail list logo
