qmail Digest 14 May 2001 10:00:00 -0000 Issue 1364
Topics (messages 62364 through 62397):
qmail-analog
62364 by: ross.pro-web.ie
Re: MASS mailing
62365 by: Mike Jackson
62370 by: Karsten W. Rohrbach
Re: qmail does not handle timezones properly?
62366 by: Adrian Ho
62368 by: Patrick Starrenburg
62369 by: Patrick Starrenburg
62374 by: Adrian Ho
62376 by: Mark Delany
62379 by: Antonio Dias
Re: Newbies vs. arrogant experts (was: Newbie with tcpserver)
62367 by: Karsten W. Rohrbach
Unsubscribe Doesn't Work
62371 by: Jim Darrough
62373 by: Brett Randall
62392 by: Andy Bradford
qmail does not handle timezones properly? - More Info
62372 by: Patrick Starrenburg
62375 by: Peter van Dijk
62377 by: Mark Delany
62378 by: Frank Tegtmeyer
62380 by: Mark Jefferys
62382 by: Felix von Leitner
62383 by: Peter van Dijk
62384 by: Patrick Starrenburg
Re: Handling high volume lists (was: Newbies vs. arrogant experts)
62381 by: Chris Garrigues
alias documentation
62385 by: Neil Grant
62386 by: Nick (Keith) Fish
How to resend individual message?
62387 by: Evelyn Huang
Default forward address for entire domain with non sytems account assign file
62388 by: Peter Janett
62390 by: Ryan Byrne
No mail arrival notice!
62389 by: Evelyn Huang
tcpserver -p and smtpd and DNS
62391 by: David Killingsworth
62395 by: Gerrit Pape
Slow start tcpserver
62393 by: Andriy T. Yanko
62394 by: tonix (Antonio Nati)
62397 by: Patrick Starrenburg
Re: Administrivia: Move to EZMLM]
62396 by: Andre Oppermann
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]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi List,
I have installed the qmail-analog software
(http://cr.yp.to/qmailanalog.html). This has been a great help as I can
now find out information on active users on my system.
Is there a simple command to identify a users details? I would like a
simple report which gives me information on a per domain or per user basis.
I would like one command which lists all the emails a certain user has
recieved....is this possable?
For the benifit of the list here are the commands I use to extract data
from the logs:
To list general details:
awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' /var/log/maillog | cat |
/usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/matchup | /usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/zoverall
To list the details of all the users ont he system:
awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' /var/log/maillog | cat |
/usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/matchup | /usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/zrecipients
To list all the people who have sent emails to our customers:
awk '{$1="";$2="";$3="";$4="";$5="";print}' /var/log/maillog | cat |
/usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/matchup | /usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/zsenders
Regards,
Ross Cooney
_________________________________________________________________________
Technical Director
Cyber Sentry Ltd, 101 Johnstown Road, Dun Laoghaire, Co Dublin, Ireland.
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Telephone: + 353 1 2352546 (sales)
Telephone: 1550 927 017 (Technical Support Ireland)
Fax: + 353 1 2847263
This communication contains information which is confidential and
may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the
intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s),
please note that any distribution, copying or use of this
communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately and then destroy any copies of it.
_________________________________________________________________________
Charles Cazabon wrote:
> There's other tricks as well, but with the above list you should easily be
> able to handle 1M deliveries a day on decent hardware. I'm afraid I'm not
> familiar with the Netra you mention.
>
Netra's are little 1U pizza box style 'servers'. They are meant for
telecom operators, etc. I use one for a qmail/courier imap server for a
few hundred users, and it's ok. I definitely would not consider it a
'high end' solution. Yes, Solaris is slow, but it's also stable. Sort of
like an old John Deere tractor ;-). I wouldn't use one of these for a
million message per day list, although a cluster of them might be ok.
Mike
Mike Jackson([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.05.13 13:46:29 +0000:
> Netra's are little 1U pizza box style 'servers'. They are meant for
> telecom operators, etc. I use one for a qmail/courier imap server for a
> few hundred users, and it's ok. I definitely would not consider it a
> 'high end' solution. Yes, Solaris is slow, but it's also stable. Sort of
> like an old John Deere tractor ;-). I wouldn't use one of these for a
> million message per day list, although a cluster of them might be ok.
suns in general are not worth the money IMVHO. i would not bother buying
suns for internet server use since pc technology prcing has dropped this
low in the last few years that a cluster of let's say four 2way smp
pentium3 boxes with scsi/raid subsystem and really much ram (~1gb/box)
costs less than a single enterprise 250 ;-)
the other fact is, that you can get a better maintained operating
system than slowlaris with better design and at least the same stability
for $0 (--> netbsd/openbsd/freebsd) that comes with a decent compiler
kit and all of the tools youre gonna ever need.
sun is a marketing organization.
the internet is a community.
it's up to every single one of us to decide what he likes best and
prefers for his operations platform *grin*
/k
ps: tco, as pointed out by their funny and colourful marketing papers,
is not the issue if you compare the amount of patches you had to apply
on solaris boxes the last 2 years to the ones for free/net/openbsd.
i mean _system_ patches, _not_ patches for subsystem like bind et al.
--
> Booze is the answer. I don't remember the question.
KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de
[Key] [KeyID---] [Created-] [Fingerprint-------------------------------------]
GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46
On Sun, 13 May 2001, Patrick Starrenburg wrote:
> I sent the mail from the client at 19:22 GMT +0200 (western Europe summer
> time) it arrived back to me about a minute later and displays on my client
> MUA as being received at **23:23** hours, i.e. four hours in the future!
> [...]
> The client PC clock said 17:22 (+0200) correct time, the Linux box
> said 17:22 and is setup correctly with TZ = GMT +0200.
I assume the 17:22 was a typo, and you really meant to type 19:22.
I think your problem is due to a fundamental misunderstanding of signed
GMT offset notation for TZ. A positive offset is actually treated as a
location _behind_ UTC (ie. _west_ of the Greenwich meridian). I can't
recall the reasoning behind this seemingly counter-intuitive notation, but
the timezone-related tools I've examined all use this convention.
This, of course, neatly accounts for the 4-hour discrepancy you're seeing.
If you want to continue using GMT offset notation on your system, you
should therefore set TZ to GST-2 (or something similar -- it's been a
while since I played with timezone info).
It may actually work better if you use a locale-name setting for TZ; the
tzselect program (if you have it) will work it out for you. For instance,
if you're living in Austria, the proper value is "Europe/Vienna".
--
Adrian Ho [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>qmail uses -0000 because it is the receiving MUA's task to display the
date in the format the user desires. If your MUA is unable to do so,
complain to the MUA author.
It does, pls check my original mail. You will see that the MUA fully and
correctly inserts the Date: field including TZ offset.
>qmail uses -0000 because only if all headers use the same timezone,
reliable debugging is possible.
?? This logic seems a red herring to me. Anyway my testing does not bear
this out, pls see my extra info email.
>qmail uses -0000 because timezone support adds a lot of code bloat
that makes no sense in an MTA. Your sending client should add a date
header.
It does, pls check my original mail.
Code bloat?? Doesn't seem like an excuse to me to (**possibly** we haven't
determined this yet) have a fundamental error in a system because someone
doesn't feel like adding code to internationalise something.
Cheers
Patrick
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
"Patrick Starrenburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>people saying qmail works as designed - why?
>Because it makes debugging easier.
? I was meaning "works as designed" putting (possibly) incorrect timestamps
on emails. Are you meaning debugging times or debugging qmail? If the former
then that is why there is a worldwide standard of local time being GMT + TZ.
If Linux can store file timestamps in GMT and display them on the fly in
local time (GMT + TZ offset) then surely qmail can do the same also.
>>It seems to be the only mail server that does so.
>So what? Is that a problem?
If it is wrong then yes! It's not a question of qmail versus the world but
qmail correct or incorrect. If incorrect then DJB et. al. ought to fix it.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
On Sun, 13 May 2001, Patrick Starrenburg wrote:
> Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >qmail uses -0000 because it is the receiving MUA's task to display the
> >date in the format the user desires. If your MUA is unable to do so,
> >complain to the MUA author.
> It does, pls check my original mail. You will see that the MUA fully and
> correctly inserts the Date: field including TZ offset.
Yes, and thanks to qmail's insistence on using -0000, it's clear that your
TZ setting is wrong (see my reply to your original mail).
> >qmail uses -0000 because only if all headers use the same timezone,
> >reliable debugging is possible.
> ?? This logic seems a red herring to me.
-0000 lets you worry about just one thing (does machine X have the correct
UTC?) rather than several things (does machine X have the correct local
time? did X's admin set TZ correctly at initial installation? is X's
current idea of TZ correct for this time of year? did X's MTA take all
the above into account _and_ print the timestamp correctly?)
-0000 lets you quickly see MTA hop intervals without having to mentally
add/subtract GMT offsets (easy to get wrong when you're in a hurry or
suffering from sleep deprivation).
In short, it's mind-boggling why most MTAs _don't_ use -0000.
--
Adrian Ho [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 05:47:46PM +0200, Patrick Starrenburg wrote:
> Code bloat?? Doesn't seem like an excuse to me to (**possibly** we haven't
> determined this yet) have a fundamental error in a system because someone
> doesn't feel like adding code to internationalise something.
Why do you suggest that there may be a "fundamental error in a
system"? Seems like a pretty unlikely conclusion just because the date
is in a format that you don't expect.
As it happens this topic has been done to death many times - you may
want to check the archives. It is not a bug nor is it a "fundamental
error in a system". Rather, it is a known and conscious decision by
the author and is allowed by the standard.
The only way to change this behaviour is for you to patch your version
of qmail - I vaguely recall someone announced a patch here, but the
archives have a better memory than me.
Regards.
Patrick,
Seens to me that qmail is doing the right thing. Below is the headers from
a message sent by you to qmail list and all date fields inserted by qmail
are using the correct time:
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun May 13 14:40:22 2001
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 13318 invoked from network); 13 May 2001 15:49:43 -0000
Received: from useful.dataloss.nl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
by a.mx.sst.com.br with QMTP; 13 May 2001 15:49:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 63964 invoked by uid 1001); 13 May 2001 15:50:20 -0000
List-Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 63959 invoked from network); 13 May 2001 15:50:19 -0000
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Originating-IP: [212.187.119.59]
From: "Patrick Starrenburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bcc:
Subject: Re: qmail does not handle timezones properly?
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 17:47:46 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 May 2001 15:47:46.0770 (UTC)
FILETIME=[0E613B20:01C0DBC4]
--
Antonio Dias
Russell Nelson([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2001.05.12 21:54:32 +0000:
> Chris Garrigues writes:
> > As it is, I consider unsubscribing several times a week (and it's not because
> > of the newbies).
>
> I send qmail list traffic into its own mailbox, and read it once a
> day. It's kind of handy, because I can see the questions which don't
> get answered, and sometimes I answer them if I feel so led.
yup, i think every mailing list subscriber should consider setting up
multiple inboxes for the lists. my setup is
qmail/procmail/safecat/mutt/vim for processing my mail (plus a bunch of
mime helper apps to view the micro$haft "rich" emails or simply bounce
them ;-)
several people i know use maildrop instead of procmail/safecat and it
also seems to work pretty good.
it saves a lot of work, and you are not tempted to flame people because
they write mails that appear in-between your normal mail folder :->
/k
--
> "I think pop music has done more for oral intercourse than anything else
> that has ever happened, and vice versa." -- Frank Zappa
KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de
[Key] [KeyID---] [Created-] [Fingerprint-------------------------------------]
GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46
Help!
I have sent three blank emails to
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" in an attempt to unsubscribe three times
without any apparent effect. Anyone got a better idea?
Thanks, Jim Darrough
Jim Darrough, ARS KI7AY
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ki7ay.com
Is [EMAIL PROTECTED] the address you subscribed with?
>>>>> "Jim" == Jim Darrough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Help!
> I have sent three blank emails to
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" in an attempt to
> unsubscribe three times without any apparent effect. Anyone
> got a better idea?
> Thanks, Jim Darrough
> Jim Darrough, ARS KI7AY
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.ki7ay.com
--
"Hardware, n.: The parts of a computer system that can be kicked."
- The Devil's Dictionary to Computer Studies
Thus said Jim Darrough on Sun, 13 May 2001 09:27:30 PDT:
> I have sent three blank emails to
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" in an attempt to unsubscribe three times
> without any apparent effect. Anyone got a better idea?
Maybe you're not subscribed to [EMAIL PROTECTED], you may have
subscribed to a sublist.
Andy
p.s. read the headers of the emails...
--
[-----------[system uptime]--------------------------------------------]
1:17am up 5 days, 3:54, 4 users, load average: 1.11, 1.12, 1.09
Dear All
OK, sigh... I was hoping to avoid the "religious OS wars" and I intend to
stick to the facts, I hope everyone else can also. I need to give you some
further details on the setup. Also I have done a further test and I still
see a problem with qmail.
I have a network (for purposes of this test we only need to worry about two
machines) Linux box running Redhat 7.1 and W2K box (with a hamster named
bill inside furiously running a spinning wheel to power the OS. Occasionaly
I chuck in a used Emacs manual for him to chew on).
Anyway... jokes aside - as far as I, and all the documentation I read, can
see both machines are correctly configured for local time as GMT + TZ
offset. I am in western Europe which is GMT +1 hour, at the moment (as it is
summer and for once the sun is shining in Holland) with daylight saving it
is GMT +02:00. So...
*Linux box*
[root@linuxbox patrick]# date
Sun May 13 17:02:55 GMT+2 2001 - Check
*W2K box*
C:\>date
The current date is: Sun 13/05/2001 - European date format naturally
C:\>time
The current time is: 17:03:13.83
System TZ settings
GMT+01:00 (with Daylight Saving +1hour) = GMT+02:00 - Check
Onto the test email... I created the mail on the W2K box, forget about the
MUA used that is irrelevant. Just note that it correctly inserts the Date:
field with GMT +0200 TZ offset. To simplify things I bounced the email off
my ISP's SMTP server back to my e-mail account on the Linux box. Now here is
the problem - firstly see that the ISP's server also uses +0200 local time
TZ offset with same time as box my MUA is on *but* when it is picked up by
qmail's SMTP daemon that timestamps it as 18:56:24 -0000. IF it was going to
use -0000 (GMT) THEN it should have changed time to 14:56:24 -0000 which is
16:56:24 *minus* the extra two hours TZ offset for my location. Instead it
has *added* two hours, then called it GMT, then when my MUA picks it up and
looks at the **Received:** field in GMT format it *correctly* converts it to
my local time of GMT +0200 and displays it to me as being received as 20:56
hours. Which, by the way, hasn't arrived yet! Thats how the 4 hours time
difference comes about.
Strange... if there is something wrong with my logic or setup of my Linux
box then please tell me (nicely, no flaming of OS's) but it seems pretty
straightforward to me. I remember something in the previous thread on this
topic in the list archive about a qmail program called "datemail" is this
meant to fix this problem and how does use it in conjunction with the qmail,
smtpd & pop3d daemons. My setup was done using qmail-conf.
Regards
Patrick
=================================
*Test email*
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: (qmail 6078 invoked from network); 13 May 2001 **18:56:24** -0000
[[[ Where does 18: come from ??]]]
Received: from unknown (HELO amsmta03-svc.chello.nl) (213.46.240.7)
by xxx.homeip.net with SMTP; 13 May 2001 **18:56:24** -0000
Received: from w2kbox by amsmta03-svc.chello.nl
(InterMail vK.4.03.02.00 201-232-124) with SMTP id
<20010513145513.IXEE12765.amsmta03-svc@w2kbox>
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sun, 13 May 2001 16:55:13 +0200
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Patrick Starrenburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Test 16:55
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 16:55:43 +0200
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:28:53PM +0200, Patrick Starrenburg wrote:
[snip]
> *Linux box*
> [root@linuxbox patrick]# date
> Sun May 13 17:02:55 GMT+2 2001 - Check
Yes.
> *W2K box*
> C:\>date
> The current date is: Sun 13/05/2001 - European date format naturally
> C:\>time
> The current time is: 17:03:13.83
> System TZ settings
> GMT+01:00 (with Daylight Saving +1hour) = GMT+02:00 - Check
Yes.
> Onto the test email... I created the mail on the W2K box, forget about the
> MUA used that is irrelevant. Just note that it correctly inserts the Date:
> field with GMT +0200 TZ offset. To simplify things I bounced the email off
> my ISP's SMTP server back to my e-mail account on the Linux box. Now here is
> the problem - firstly see that the ISP's server also uses +0200 local time
> TZ offset with same time as box my MUA is on *but* when it is picked up by
> qmail's SMTP daemon that timestamps it as 18:56:24 -0000. IF it was going to
> use -0000 (GMT) THEN it should have changed time to 14:56:24 -0000 which is
> 16:56:24 *minus* the extra two hours TZ offset for my location. Instead it
> has *added* two hours, then called it GMT, then when my MUA picks it up and
> looks at the **Received:** field in GMT format it *correctly* converts it to
> my local time of GMT +0200 and displays it to me as being received as 20:56
> hours. Which, by the way, hasn't arrived yet! Thats how the 4 hours time
> difference comes about.
qmail never changes the Date: header for mails. It only adds one for
locally-injected mails. If your sending MUA inserted a Date header,
that is the header the receiving MUA sees. If this is not true, either
one of the other mailsystems in the chain is misconfigured, or you are
doing something weird on your qmail machine.
Greetz, Peter.
Your problem is almost certainly not qmail related.
First off you may want to learn how Unix/Linux keeps time. Believe it
or not, Unix/Linux don't know anything about timezones. They all keep
time internally in UTC (nee GMT). Yes, every Unix server on the planet
current has the same time. To see what it is, run this command from
the shell:
perl -e 'print time,"\n"'
You should get a number back that reflects the number of seconds since
00:00UTC, Jan 1, 1970.
When you run something like the date command, it takes this internal
number, looks up your current timezone setting and *converts* the
internal number to an external representation that matches your
timezone.
So, what you've shown us with your "date" command is simply that the
combination of the internal time of your server + the timezone setting
gives you the correct display.
Now, qmail does not do *any* conversion when it generates it's
timestamp, it takes the raw internal time value and prints it without
looking at any timezone info.
So, to answer your question:
> Received: (qmail 6078 invoked from network); 13 May 2001 **18:56:24** -0000
> [[[ Where does 18: come from ??]]]
The "18" comes from the internal time value maintained by your
kernel. Your kernel believes that it is currently 18:56:24 UTC. If
that is not the current UTC time then the internal value in your
kernel is set wrong.
You can find out what your kernel thinks is UTC by going:
TZ=GMT date
from your shell.
I'll bet that the output from that command matches the date/time in
the qmail header.
Regards.
"Patrick Starrenburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (as it is summer and for once the sun is shining in Holland) with
> daylight saving it is GMT +02:00. So...
I repeat: there must something wrong with your Linux setup. Qmail uses
system calls of the underlying operating system to generate the
timestamps. If they are wrong it gets wrong data from the system
(see now.c in the sources).
Did you try to set CET? Maybe your timezone definitions are corrupted?
Besides that you created a new thread, effectively destroying the
possibility to follow the discussion in an efficient way. Plus you
gave no new information, you only repeated your first mail.
So don't expect new answers.
Regards, Frank
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:28:53PM +0200, Patrick Starrenburg wrote:
% *Linux box*
% [root@linuxbox patrick]# date
% Sun May 13 17:02:55 GMT+2 2001 - Check
Your clock seems to be set wrong. According to Solaris and at least
one web page I dug up, <http://www.bsdi.com/date>, GMT+2 is a posix
time zone equivalent to GMT-0200 (!). Your linux box thinks that you
are sitting somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean.
Try setting your local TZ to "Europe/Amsterdam", and reset your clock.
Mark
Thus spake Patrick Starrenburg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> =================================
> *Test email*
> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Received: (qmail 6078 invoked from network); 13 May 2001 **18:56:24** -0000
> [[[ Where does 18: come from ??]]]
> Received: from unknown (HELO amsmta03-svc.chello.nl) (213.46.240.7)
> by xxx.homeip.net with SMTP; 13 May 2001 **18:56:24** -0000
> Received: from w2kbox by amsmta03-svc.chello.nl
> (InterMail vK.4.03.02.00 201-232-124) with SMTP id
> <20010513145513.IXEE12765.amsmta03-svc@w2kbox>
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> Sun, 13 May 2001 16:55:13 +0200
> Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: "Patrick Starrenburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Test 16:55
> Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 16:55:43 +0200
The date headers is OK.
So what you are actually talking about is the Received lines.
The date "18:56:24 -0000" is equivalent to the date "16:56:24 +0200", so
there is no error whatsoever here. The MTA prints the date as GMT,
which actually is a feature, because it allows easy comparison of dates
by humans, without having to calculate away time zones.
Felix
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 09:10:12PM +0200, Felix von Leitner wrote:
[snip]
>
> The date "18:56:24 -0000" is equivalent to the date "16:56:24 +0200", so
> there is no error whatsoever here. The MTA prints the date as GMT,
> which actually is a feature, because it allows easy comparison of dates
> by humans, without having to calculate away time zones.
18:56:24 -0000 equals 20:56:24 +0200, at least within qmail. This is
not POSIX notation, hence your confusion.
I say we stop this thread. The user's box is misconfigured and he's
failing to see why UTC in headers is good. Let it be.
Greetz, Peter.
Thanks to Adrian Ho and Mark Jefferys explanations for the solution. Adrian
you were halfway there with your first reply and Mark's link pointed me in
the right direction to track down the problem. The TZ setting was GMT +2
which apparently means actually the box was calculating GMT **minus 2
hours**. That seems logical?! I had selected Amsterdam during installation
of Redhat but obviously had changed it sometime thereafter during setup and
testing of qmail. Obviously from the above I was not aware of the counter
intuitiveness of Posix time zones!!
I just wanted to point out a couple of things also to the list:
1) I *had* already read through the *complete* thread on this topic not
wanting to rehash an old issue *before* I posted the question to the list
but I did not determine that there was a clear explanation of the topic. I
was aware of the discussion re: the Date: field. That's why I specifically
mentioned that my MUA inserted it, however some persons simply erroneously
jumped on that topic again. In my case it was nothing to do with the Date:
field.
2) I recall that the discussion about this in the archive went on for
*much* longer than this thread and still then there was no clear clean
answer. This obviously is a point of potential confusion that perhaps one of
the more experienced qmail members could write a FAQ about. DJB's document -
http://cr.yp.to/immhf/date.html gives information but is not ideally suited
to a FAQ type of document.
3) If this list is for technical questions regarding qmail then you are
going to get people *starting* with qmail, and yes... maybe even starting
with Linux. And that means starters questions. If we are going to follow
DJB's wish to spread the use of qmail then you are going to get more of
those types of questions...
4) And finally - On Sun, 13 May 2001, Peter van Dijk wrote:
>I say we stop this thread. The user's box is misconfigured and he's
>failing to see why UTC in headers is good. Let it be.
Gee thanks Peter - you are the list owner are you? I believe your politeness
is misconfigured. I'd like to point out that you didn't provide an answer,
in fact you said...
[snip]
>>*Linux box*
>>[root@linuxbox patrick]# date
>>Sun May 13 17:02:55 GMT+2 2001 - Check
>Yes.
So you didn't pick up on the incorrect TZ setting. Of course we all
suspected something was (possibly) wrong with my Linux box, even I was
saying that! What we were looking for was a solution or a pointer to the
solution. Perhaps this list *should* be moderated.
Thanks again everyone esp. Adrian & Mark.
PS
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
> From: "Robin S. Socha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 13 May 2001 10:18:45 +0200
>
> * Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010512 20:57]:
> > Chris Garrigues writes:
>
> >> As it is, I consider unsubscribing several times a week (and it's
> >> not because of the newbies).
>
> > I send qmail list traffic into its own mailbox, and read it once a
> > day. It's kind of handy, because I can see the questions which don't
> > get answered, and sometimes I answer them if I feel so led.
>
...
> But it's much easier to whine and groan, Chris, instead of taking some
> action, isn't it? After all, your post was brought to us via softmail
> written by the same k3wl D00d3 who invented the Internet (no, not Al
> "Treehugger" Gore, but the Great Chairman Gill Bates himself), so it
> *has* to be okay, eh? Not.
[ Since you mentioned me by name, I guess i won't ignore your generally useful
message with a generally negative tone. ]
I have no idea what you mean by "softmail written by [Bill Gates]".
My post was written in exmh which is layered on top of mh running under Linux
and delivered using qmail via a firewall/mailrelay also running qmail to a
mailing list running ezmlm and qmail to you. If there was anything "written"
by Bill Gates, it's not on my end.
Clearly you didn't look at the headers of my original message, and in fact,
I'll assume you didn't even read it since you apparently decided for no good
reason that I must be a user of microsoft software.
Allow me to quote myself from the message that you ignored:
> I've been on this list now since late 1996 and in recent times, it's become
> almost intolerable with all the flamage. Somehow on other lists people manage
> to co-exist with newbies without having to extract a pound of flesh with every
> question. I suspect that if this list had been this rude in 1996, I would
> have stuck with sendmail.
Most likely you looked at the one sentence that Russell quoted and thought to
your self: "Hey! An opportunity to prove to some whinny little twit how much
smarter he'd be if he used the cool tools that I use."
It's exactly this attitude that I was referring to in the parenthetical comment
that Russell quoted. Can't we try to give the benefit of a doubt instead of
looking at every post as an opportunity to prove that we have bigger opensource
balls than the next guy?
--
Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/
virCIO http://www.virCIO.Com
4314 Avenue C
Austin, TX 78751-3709 +1 512 374 0500
My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination. For an
explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html
Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft,
but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft.
PGP signature
maybe this is a stupidly easy question but I cant find where do I find out
about the format of .alias files, and other documentation on them?
Neil
Neil Grant wrote:
>
> maybe this is a stupidly easy question but I cant find where do I find out
> about the format of .alias files, and other documentation on them?
>
> Neil
`man dot-qmail`
or if you didn't put qmail's man files in one of your MANPATH directories:
`man -M /var/qmail/man dot-qmail`
--
Keith
Network Engineer
Triton Technologies, Inc.
|
Hi,
Thanks for all the people who replied
to my questions earlier!!
But can anyone here tell me how I can
resend individual message?
Besides, if I don't have a legitimate domain name, there is no
way for me to test if the incoming messages from remote addresses work,
right?
Again, thanks for all you kind
help!!!
Evelyn Huang
|
I apologize if this is a dumb question, but I can't seem to figure out how
to set up a default forwarding address for virtual domains. In other words,
if an email is sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], it will be forwarded to a
preset address.
Maybe it has something to do with the setup I'm using, which is Paul Gregg's
non system account setup, http://www.pgregg.com/projects/.
I had the impression that I should setup something using + in the assign
file, but I'm just not figuring it out.
Any help appreciated,
Peter Janett
New Media One Web Services
================================
WEB HOSTING FOR WEB DEVELOPERS
================================
Sun, IRIX, Windows 2000, Linux;
PHP, MySQL, Perl, Cold Fusion,
MS SQL, ASP, SSI, SSL
http://www.newmediaone.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(303)828-9882
Check Man page for qmail-send - virtualdomains. You may
also need to use an alias (man dot-qmail).
Hope this helps,
~~Moose~~
On Sun, 13 May 2001, Peter Janett wrote:
> I apologize if this is a dumb question, but I can't seem to figure out how
> to set up a default forwarding address for virtual domains. In other words,
> if an email is sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], it will be forwarded to a
> preset address.
>
> Maybe it has something to do with the setup I'm using, which is Paul Gregg's
> non system account setup, http://www.pgregg.com/projects/.
>
> I had the impression that I should setup something using + in the assign
> file, but I'm just not figuring it out.
>
> Any help appreciated,
>
> Peter Janett
>
> New Media One Web Services
> ================================
> WEB HOSTING FOR WEB DEVELOPERS
> ================================
> Sun, IRIX, Windows 2000, Linux;
> PHP, MySQL, Perl, Cold Fusion,
> MS SQL, ASP, SSI, SSL
> http://www.newmediaone.net
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (303)828-9882
>
>
>
--
Ryan Byrne
Server Analyst
Technical Services
John Fairfax Holdings
(02) 9282 3634
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
There is no mail arrival notice while
the message would show up in $HOME/Mailbox! What seems to be the
problem? Thanks a lot!!
CY Wang
I have been running qmail for about 8 months, It works great.
So far I have not been able to resolve on problem.
When an smtp connection comes in we only want to connect
with servers who have forward and reverse DNS that match.
I managed to install a macro into sendmail (mail server we replaced)
in about 15 minutes that takes the IP of the incoming smtp request
looks up the name, then looks up the IP for the NAME. the IP
should be the same as the connecting host. If this is not the case
the smtp connection should be dropped.
I use tcpserver to start smtpd.
I use the -p (paranoid) option, (added the option a few days ago)
which by my preliminary understanding was supposed to accomplish
this task of DNS cross-matching.
However I receieved an email recently whois headers are
Received: from unknown (HELO www.somang.or.kr) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
I noticed that there isn't a hostname.
nslookup 211.38.3.100 will return no hostname.
So back to the drawing board.
http://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp/tcpserver.html ( <-- drawing board)
I notice -p: Paranoid. After looking up the remote host name in DNS, look up
the IP addresses in
DNS for that host name, and remove the environment variable
$TCPREMOTEHOST if none of the addresses match the client's IP address.
upon re-reading this option I notice it did what it says it does,
It removed the $TCPREMOTEHOST, hence the "Received: from unknown "
I still got the email. So now I figure that $TCPREMOTEHOST is
passed to smtpd in the environment variables.
so somehow I need to tell smtpd to close
if "condition" is not met.
Oh.. I have read the man pages. I have installed qmail, vpopmail,
on more than a dozen
servers for nearly that many clients. I understand quite abit.
David Killingsworth.
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 06:30:44AM -0000, David Killingsworth wrote:
> I have been running qmail for about 8 months, It works great.
> So far I have not been able to resolve on problem.
> When an smtp connection comes in we only want to connect
> with servers who have forward and reverse DNS that match.
>
I allready anwered your question in alt.comp.mail.qmail some days ago. What
is wrong with my answer?
Gerrit.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
innominate AG
the linux architects
tel: +49.30.308806-0 fax: -77 http://www.innominate.com
Hi ALL!
I decided try tcpserver program for qmail services (smtpd & pop3d).
It's work properly but sometimes tcpserver strarting very slow
( more than 30 sec ! ).
When I used xinetd for starting qmail-smtpd & qmail-pop3d I never must wait
for starting it.
--- /etc/rc.d/rc.qmail ---
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -H -R -v -u 514 -g 503 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb 0 25
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \
2>> /var/log/qmail-smtp.log &
/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -H -R -v -x /etc/tcp.pop3.cdb 0 110
/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mserver \
/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>> /var/log/qmail-pop3.log &
--- end ---
What I do wrong?
Thx.
--
Good Luck! Andriy T. Yanko
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ# 83047775 Powered by Linux |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Try to use the -l <name> parameter on tcpserver.
Tonino
At 14/05/2001 14/05/2001 +0300, Andriy T. Yanko wrote:
>Hi ALL!
>
>I decided try tcpserver program for qmail services (smtpd & pop3d).
>It's work properly but sometimes tcpserver strarting very slow
>( more than 30 sec ! ).
>
>When I used xinetd for starting qmail-smtpd & qmail-pop3d I never must wait
>for starting it.
>
>--- /etc/rc.d/rc.qmail ---
>/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -H -R -v -u 514 -g 503 -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb 0 25
>/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd \
>2>> /var/log/qmail-smtp.log &
>
>/usr/local/bin/tcpserver -H -R -v -x /etc/tcp.pop3.cdb 0 110
>/var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup mserver \
>/bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir 2>>
>/var/log/qmail-pop3.log &
>
>--- end ---
>
>
>What I do wrong?
>Thx.
>--
>Good Luck! Andriy T. Yanko
>
>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>| E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ# 83047775 Powered by
>Linux |
>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>
Dear Andriy
I believe the -l switch should solve your problem as the other person
mentioned. If you are getting into using tcpserver and the other services
written by qmail's author you may wish to look at qmail-conf
http://www.din.or.jp/~ushijima/qmail-conf.html
as this does a nice job of setting up all configuration files and logging
via multilog and you can look how the author sets up calling tcpserver. Read
his docs though as the program does a complete setup which you may or may
not wish to go with.
Good luck
Patrick
==============================
Hi ALL!
I decided try tcpserver program for qmail services (smtpd & pop3d).
It's work properly but sometimes tcpserver strarting very slow
( more than 30 sec ! ).
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Hehe, finally it worked out! :-)
First Aleph1 didn't like qmail/ezmlm at all... but appearently there
is nothing else out there which can do the job.
--
Andre
Good day,
[ I apologize to those that will receive this message multiple times ]
As undoubtedly you will have noticed by now we experienced some problem
with our mailing lists this past week. In short, LISTSERV finally croaked.
It simply could not handle the load. We hoped to perform the these changes
in a couple of months as part of our upgrade strategy but we were forced
to accelerate our scheduled plans.
We have moved the mailing lists over to ezmlm-idx. This will require a
little getting used to but it should not be particularly challenging.
ezmlm-idx offers most of the features LISTSERV does and a few of its own.
Performance wise it should give LISTSERV a good beating.
To familiarize yourself with ezmlm-idx review the ezman manual at
http://www.ezmlm.org/ezman-0.32/index.html.
If you were using the digest option under LISTSERV you will need
to unsubscribe from the list and resubscribe to the digest. This
can be easily accomplished by sending messages to the
<list>[EMAIL PROTECTED] and
<list>[EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses.
Messages that had been received by LISTSERV but not yet processed,
including messages that had become stuck on its queue and appeared
to disappear last week, have been re-injected into the mail system.
List moderators may, or may not, approve them, as appropriate.
Aside from the speed benefits of ezmlm, messages now include a
Precedence header which should cut down on the number of out-of-office
and similar messages people that post to the list get. This is a feature
L-Soft refused to provide. If you ever post to the list this should
make you very happy.
People that send messages with strange Sender headers should have
no more problems either. Another quirk of LISTSERV L-Soft did not
believe to be a problem.
If you have any questions or comments please feel free to contact me.
Cheers.
--
Elias Levy
SecurityFocus.com
http://www.securityfocus.com/
Si vis pacem, para bellum
