On Mon, May 3, 2010 6:19 pm, Wilberth Pérez wrote:
Hi everyone:
Anyone knows what are the differences (or advantages and disadvantages)
between Postfix with Dovecot LDA Vs. Postfix with Procmail LDA?
Advantages and disadvantages for which use(s)?
- Answer will likely not be the same if
On Sun, May 23, 2010 3:39 pm, Patrick Chemla wrote:
Le 23/05/2010 18:20, Wietse Venema a écrit :
Patrick Chemla:
[snip incomplete problem description]
I made something wrong, but what?
TO REPORT A PROBLEM see http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail
TO (UN)SUBSCRIBE see
On Thu, June 3, 2010 3:35 pm, gmx wrote:
So as per http://www.postfix.org/mysql_table.5.html each of the mysql
config files contains a
hosts = mydbhost.domain.tld
user = mydbUser
password = myPassword
dbname = myDB
section before the query.
Once any of these parameters needs to be
On Thu, June 3, 2010 6:31 pm, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 06:00:26PM -, Pau Amma wrote:
foo.cf: dbConf.cf.in foo.cf.in
cat dbConf.cf.in foo.cf.in foo.cf
Make that:
foo.cf: dbConf.cf.in foo.cf.in
$(RM) -f foo.cf.tmp
cat
On Wed, June 30, 2010 6:37 am, Stefan Foerster wrote:
I don't think the professors would like it very much if _their_ mail had
lower priority than their students' ;-)
But some students may like it the other way. The postfix ate my
homework. :-)
On Mon, September 19, 2011 2:29 pm, Tawanda Kavayi wrote:
The number of users does not make it practical to configure each and
every remote user's email address in virtual_alias_maps, and it would be
a nightmare to manage.
I would be very surprised if there was no way to automate that
On Sun, December 11, 2011 5:44 pm, Wietse Venema wrote:
Combining memcache and proxymap
---
It seems that memcache is best for (surprise) doing what it was
designed for: a cache layer on top of a persistent database, where
the cache is maintained by the clients of
On Sun, February 20, 2011 1:05 pm, Matthias Egger wrote:
[...]
My Question:
While i am snooping and waiting for connections from this particular
server, other incoming mails should be rejected by this temporary
postfix. But only in a soft reject manner. So is there a way to
configure (or
On Sun, February 27, 2011 9:14 pm, Wietse Venema wrote:
By the way, closefrom() does not seem to have a manpage before
FreeBSD 7.3, and that manpage says The closefrom() function first
appeared in FreeBSD 8.0. Come on, people.
That's correct, technically at least. (And as far as FreeBSD
On Tue, April 5, 2011 2:02 pm, Wietse Venema wrote:
I'm
not good at diplomacy.
Wietse
We know. We like you anyway. :-)
On Sun, May 15, 2011 12:54 pm, Jeroen Geilman wrote:
On 05/15/2011 02:50 PM, jason hirsh wrote:
this is the record of the exchange.. it does not appear to be what you
expected though
08:40:31.036997 IP mail-iy0-f182.google.com.51101
tuna.theoceanwindow-bv.com.smtp: Flags [S], seq
On Mon, July 16, 2012 10:14 am, Silvio Siefke wrote:
Hello,
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 20:26:04 -0400
Daniel Bromberg dan...@basezen.com wrote:
http://www.postfix.org/lists.html#online
but all can only read online, nothing find where can download the message.
When Mailman is the list Manager,
On Tue, December 11, 2012 8:16 pm, Noel Jones wrote:
On 12/11/2012 2:02 PM, Gary Baribault wrote:
Oh no!! Your curiosity got me to read it too .. countdown has
started to armageddon, 10 days and counting!!
Somehow, Armageddon seems wrong for the Mayan end-of-time.
On Mon, January 14, 2013 4:46 pm, Wietse Venema wrote:
I did not expect that Postfix would end up with little-endian versus
big-endian issues, but there we are.
JANET (dammit!)
(Probably showing my age on several counts.)
On Mon, March 4, 2013 6:31 pm, Blake Hudson wrote:
OK, so we ask for a PTR on 212.0.171.63.in-addr.arpa and instead receive
a CNAME (with additional). Did anyone notice that the CNAME does not
resolve?
Does for me. *shrug*
$ dig +noall +question +answer -x 63.171.0.212
On Tue, April 30, 2013 2:17 pm, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 30.04.2013 16:02, schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:33:25AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Apr 29 02:33:03 localhost postfix/cleanup[8012]: 36CA45F1B2:
message-id=20120429003303.36CA45F1B2@localhost
damned - where did you
On Mon, August 5, 2013 5:12 am, Yishen Miao wrote:
On Aug 4, 2013, at 9:54 PM, wie...@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
Yishen Miao:
I wonder is there any plan about adding such feature to postfix?
There are no such plans. If random people can read a private key
file that is read-only for
On Thu, November 9, 2017 12:03 pm, Mathieu R. wrote:
> I try to setup a debian/Mysql/Postfix/dovecot server
> Here is the error i got in mail.log. I checked my mysql_relay_domains
> twice, but i can't find my mistake
...
> Nov 7 22:05:11 vps81550 postfix/trivial-rewrite[23471]: warning: mysql
>
On Fri, January 18, 2019 9:24 pm, John Stoffel wrote:
>> "Wietse" == Wietse Venema writes:
>
> Wietse> I'm implementing logfile support for Postfix on MacOS, because not
> Wietse> providing results in a bad experience.
>
> Wietse> This is a retrofit workaround, therefore it will have
On Wed, December 26, 2018 8:14 pm, Volker Cordes wrote:
> how do I reject mails that use an @-sign in the display name of the from
> header?
Have you read http://www.postfix.org/BUILTIN_FILTER_README.html ?
On Mon, March 4, 2019 5:29 am, James Brown wrote:
> Postfix 3.4.0, using Dovecot for SASL authentication and MySQL.
>
> I have set:
>
> unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 550
>
> But when an email comes through to an unknown user, a 451 Temporary Lookup
> Failure code is given, not a 550:
>
>
On Sun, June 9, 2019 9:29 pm, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>
> In message
> <0100016b3e069855-f95cf3e2-9649-4a55-8290-24a9d44f80cc-00@email.
> amazonses.com>, Antonio Leding wrote:
>
>>Just curious any reason to not use use the could-based Postfix
>>server + something like Dovecot and then have
On 2020-09-13 21:22, Steven Jones wrote:
I am trying to setup a mailman server but it has a different
domainname to the hostname and its FQDN. When I try and create a list
and Mailman tries to send it I get,
I get this error,
8><---
Sep 14 09:12:49 vuwunicomailmp1 postfix/smtpd[66783]: fatal:
On 2020-06-25 01:39, Greg Sims wrote:
It is interesting to note the following:
- If I "systemctl restart postfix", the restart will happen
successfully.
- If I reboot the KVM, I will see the error above after the reboot
- I have tried changing Postfix and System configuration to get
On 2020-06-19 06:47, Fourhundred Thecat wrote:
postfix/smtpd: connect from unknown[unknown]
postfix/smtpd: lost connection after CONNECT from unknown[unknown]
postfix/smtpd: disconnect from unknown[unknown] commands=0/0
how can postfix not see the IP address?
Why does it say
As was repeatedly pointed out to you, 74 is not the same as 75.
On 2020-06-26 16:56, Greg Sims wrote:
ip addr
=
3: ens4: mtu 1500 qdisc fq_codel
state
UP group default qlen 1000
link/ether xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 108.xxx.xxx.45/29 brd 108.xxx.xxx.47 scope
On 2020-06-07 18:44, Norton Allen wrote:
[undeserved snippage]
Someone has suggested that we make a small change, a change that Black
people have said would make them feel better, and all we can do is
argue that making that change would be too difficult, unnecessary,
ineffective or
Wietse Venema has stated that he would implement (some variant of) the
original request and asked twice for the on-list discussion to stop. At
this stage, I believe it is pointless, and all arguments for or against
have been made several times already. Can we please return to on-topic
matters?
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#inet_protocols says:
inet_protocols = all (DEFAULT)
http://www.postfix.org/IPV6_README.html says: inet_protocols = ipv4
(DEFAULT: enable IPv4 only)
The inconsistency should be fixed.
On 2021-08-26 14:43, Wietse Venema wrote:
post...@ptld.com:
How can i get postfix to use line breaks and format closer to how
other
servers do it?
Sorry, Postfix does not support ASCII art. Seriously, only nerds
care about multiline server responses.
*delurks*
Another reason to avoid
On 2021-01-21 05:03, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 04:37:19AM +, Pau Amma wrote:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#inet_protocols says:
inet_protocols = all (DEFAULT)
http://www.postfix.org/IPV6_README.html says: inet_protocols = ipv4
(DEFAULT: enable IPv4 only
On 2022-04-30 05:06, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 12:49:30AM +, Pau Amma wrote:
I finally got around to this, or rather to the half that didn't have a
mention of NO_IPV6. While there, I noticed a stray uppercase letter
elsewhere (2x) and fixed that as well. Patch
On 2022-05-01 18:14, Wietse Venema wrote:
Pau Amma:
Still, there is room for making the link text shorter than I
suggested while still providing enough context. For example, "tips how
to port Postfix IPv6 support" or "how to port Postfix IPv6 support"
may
be enough c
On 2022-05-01 00:09, Wietse Venema wrote:
Pau Amma:
On 2022-04-30 05:06, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 12:49:30AM +0000, Pau Amma wrote:
>
>> I finally got around to this, or rather to the half that didn't have a
>> mention of NO_IPV6. While there, I noticed
34 matches
Mail list logo
