[vchkpw] ::fff:127.0.0.1
Hi, We're running vpopmail and things work well except I have a question regarding the relay records... In our Mysql table relay we always get two enries starting with ::fff:. They are the local ip ::fff:127.0.0.1 and our local network ::fff:195.xxx.xxx. I have seen people talking about older versions of vpopmail and/or courier etc but how can this be solved. The clearopensmtp gives error when these records are present. I have to manually delete them from the table and then run it... Annoying and quite irritating.. Everything else works smoothly. We run vpopmail 5.4.4(same problem with older ver) with mysql auth, qmail (netqmail-1.05), courier-imap 2.2.2. Regards Stefan G
[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
Hi list, I found a patch [1] at [2] which enables qmail to first check against vpopmail if the user (email-address) is existant before accepting mail for it. Yesterday I asked in #qmail (IRC-channel) for any experiences and/or recommendations with this patch and have been told by Jeremy Kitchen that this patch is UGLY and HORRIBLE and has glibc-stuff in it. As he seems to have a little bit more experience than me, I trust him. :-) Anyway, I am still looking for a solution for this problem, maybe a solution which also checks if catch-all is activated for this domain. Right now we make the experience that a lot of spam and virus-mails are coming in and make the queue growing up enormously. I hope on the new systems, it will not be that bad by applying the ext-todo patch against the silly-qmail-syndrome, but I want these machines making be a little bit more secure. Because of the fact, that this solution would be a patch or anything else against vpopmail (maybe activating this functionality in qmail-smtp), I didn't ask in the qmail-list and hope this is the right place... Greetings Tobias [1] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/easy-way-1.0.patch [2] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/#qmail-smtpd
[vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
Tobias, it looks like there is a trust against this patch, just saying generically it's ugly, but not beeing able to say why, and not beeing able, mainly, to make another one working. This patch is highly responding to DJ security and programming models, while all the rest around (including vpopmail) is not, so all the attacks are without comprension (or people attacking does not understand what is speaking about). This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. This patch has also be included in other bigger containers, like Bill Shupp megapatch and Matt Simerson Toaster. I'm old and experienced enought to understand the real skills of people, and what's working and what not. If you install the patch and use it, you'll learn another way to know and trust people: by judging their work, and not their words. Tonino At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 +0200, you wrote: Hi list, I found a patch [1] at [2] which enables qmail to first check against vpopmail if the user (email-address) is existant before accepting mail for it. Yesterday I asked in #qmail (IRC-channel) for any experiences and/or recommendations with this patch and have been told by Jeremy Kitchen that this patch is UGLY and HORRIBLE and has glibc-stuff in it. As he seems to have a little bit more experience than me, I trust him. :-) Anyway, I am still looking for a solution for this problem, maybe a solution which also checks if catch-all is activated for this domain. Right now we make the experience that a lot of spam and virus-mails are coming in and make the queue growing up enormously. I hope on the new systems, it will not be that bad by applying the ext-todo patch against the silly-qmail-syndrome, but I want these machines making be a little bit more secure. Because of the fact, that this solution would be a patch or anything else against vpopmail (maybe activating this functionality in qmail-smtp), I didn't ask in the qmail-list and hope this is the right place... Greetings Tobias [1] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/easy-way-1.0.patch [2] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/#qmail-smtpd [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- La tua posta elettronica senza virus su UfficioPostale.IT Your virus free electronic mail on UfficioPostale.IT
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2004 11:26 schrieb Tonix: Tobias, it looks like there is a trust against this patch, just saying generically it's ugly, but not beeing able to say why, and not beeing able, mainly, to make another one working. This patch is highly responding to DJ security and programming models, while all the rest around (including vpopmail) is not, so all the attacks are without comprension (or people attacking does not understand what is speaking about). Thats why I asked on the list. I never worked with this patch and have no experience in coding to analyze if it is crap or not. This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. Good to hear. Are there any facts how much it would decrease performance lets say at about 800-1000 smtp-connections per minute? This patch has also be included in other bigger containers, like Bill Shupp megapatch and Matt Simerson Toaster. Good to know... I'm old and experienced enought to understand the real skills of people, and what's working and what not. ok If you install the patch and use it, you'll learn another way to know and trust people: by judging their work, and not their words. I learned it already. Like I worte: One person out of millions said... Another experience I made is to ask other people for experiences _before_ I do something, especially before installing software or applying patches to systems which are essential and have to run properly. Tonino [...] Another question: Does this patch look, if there is a catch-all for the domain? Is there anything to take care of when using vpopmail with MySQL in conjunction with this patch? Greetings Tobias -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD4DBQFAtbnubZe1CSCwYlARAps0AJIDIsojcRZ8RVR/oW5TvXSifTewAJ4j0xE3 wkRllBi0MGBCeNfF+Ih0aw== =t8nn -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
* Tonix [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-05-27 11:31]: This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. Tonino, I appreciate your work and use the patch in some production systems with success. But there is at least one problem that can be considered as bug. if you use comments in .qmail-default like in: #| /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' bounce-no-mailbox | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' /home/vpopmail/domains/domain.de/user your patch recognizes bounce-no-mailbox which is wrong. This problem won't occur if you avoid changing .qmail-files by hand (using comments). BTW, some time ago you promised a surprise. Can we expect a new version of chkusr? Alex -- Alex Pleiner zeitform Internet Dienste Fraunhoferstrasse 5 64283 Darmstadt, Germany http://www.zeitform.deTel.: +49 (0)6151 155-635 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Fax: +49 (0)6151 155-634 GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0x613C21EA
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
Alex, At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 +0200, you wrote: .. But there is at least one problem that can be considered as bug. if you use comments in .qmail-default like in: #| /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' bounce-no-mailbox | /home/vpopmail/bin/vdelivermail '' /home/vpopmail/domains/domain.de/user your patch recognizes bounce-no-mailbox which is wrong. This problem won't occur if you avoid changing .qmail-files by hand (using comments). You're right, but I don't see it as a bug (that piece of code replied - at that time - qmailadmin way of examining bouncing). Using a commented line is a workaround for maildrop users, so if I avoid commented lines for them is bad. Ok, ... I'll have to study and add some #define to next version, or add an external reference file (I'ld like to avoid any new file). What do you think about ? BTW, some time ago you promised a surprise. Can we expect a new version of chkusr? I'm planning a new version, with unified and simplified installation and some new features (like quota checking and basic filtering), but I lack time to work on it... Hope within the summer. Ciao, Tonino Alex -- Alex Pleiner zeitform Internet Dienste Fraunhoferstrasse 5 64283 Darmstadt, Germany http://www.zeitform.de Tel.: +49 (0)6151 155-635 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +49 (0)6151 155-634 GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0x613C21EA [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 +0200, you wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Another question: Does this patch look, if there is a catch-all for the domain? Yes, does look for catchall, aliases, mailing lists. Is there anything to take care of when using vpopmail with MySQL in conjunction with this patch? Just modify accordingly your Makefile. Ciao, Tonino -END PGP SIGNATURE- [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
I don't have that load, so I can't say. For my needs, routine is practically not existent, and far much less heavy than qmail-scanner. For sure your outgoing queue will be reduced, and your network traffic will drop (because all wrong messages will be stopped before entering). Just you'll have to increase max SQL connections, because each message recipient will be validated and need an SQL connection (chkuser - vpopmail - MySQL). Ciao, Tonino At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 +0200, you wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Good to hear. Are there any facts how much it would decrease performance lets say at about 800-1000 smtp-connections per minute? -END PGP SIGNATURE- [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- La tua posta elettronica senza virus su UfficioPostale.IT Your virus free electronic mail on UfficioPostale.IT
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
Hi, I have nothing but great things to say about Tonix's patch and the code is quite straight forward to read, even for an old C programmer like me. I use it personally and have it installed on more than 20 ISP and end user systems with no problems. Regards, Rick Tonix wrote: Tobias, it looks like there is a trust against this patch, just saying generically it's ugly, but not beeing able to say why, and not beeing able, mainly, to make another one working. This patch is highly responding to DJ security and programming models, while all the rest around (including vpopmail) is not, so all the attacks are without comprension (or people attacking does not understand what is speaking about). This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. This patch has also be included in other bigger containers, like Bill Shupp megapatch and Matt Simerson Toaster. I'm old and experienced enought to understand the real skills of people, and what's working and what not. If you install the patch and use it, you'll learn another way to know and trust people: by judging their work, and not their words. Tonino At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 +0200, you wrote: Hi list, I found a patch [1] at [2] which enables qmail to first check against vpopmail if the user (email-address) is existant before accepting mail for it. Yesterday I asked in #qmail (IRC-channel) for any experiences and/or recommendations with this patch and have been told by Jeremy Kitchen that this patch is UGLY and HORRIBLE and has glibc-stuff in it. As he seems to have a little bit more experience than me, I trust him. :-) Anyway, I am still looking for a solution for this problem, maybe a solution which also checks if catch-all is activated for this domain. Right now we make the experience that a lot of spam and virus-mails are coming in and make the queue growing up enormously. I hope on the new systems, it will not be that bad by applying the ext-todo patch against the silly-qmail-syndrome, but I want these machines making be a little bit more secure. Because of the fact, that this solution would be a patch or anything else against vpopmail (maybe activating this functionality in qmail-smtp), I didn't ask in the qmail-list and hope this is the right place... Greetings Tobias [1] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/easy-way-1.0.patch [2] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/#qmail-smtpd [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- La tua posta elettronica senza virus su UfficioPostale.IT Your virus free electronic mail on UfficioPostale.IT
[vchkpw] howto block incoming mails for a vhost
Hi folks! I want to block a vhost with about 100 pop3-Accounts, but dont want to delete this vhost with vpopmail. - qmail dont shell deliver to this vhosts the incoming emails. Do someone know what its the best way to do it? Can I manipulate a control file to do it best? Does vpopmail work with the other domains with no problem? Gruesse, Peter. -- www: http://peter.tux.hm www: http://tux.hm - Linux- und BSD-UserGroup im Weserbergland gpg: http://blackhole.pca.dfn.de:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x690A1AC2
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
On Thursday 27 May 2004 04:26 am, Tonix wrote: Tobias, it looks like there is a trust against this patch, just saying generically it's ugly, but not beeing able to say why, and not beeing able, mainly, to make another one working. This patch is highly responding to DJ security and programming models, while all the rest around (including vpopmail) is not, so all the attacks are without comprension (or people attacking does not understand what is speaking about). *ahem* +#include stdio.h This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. I continually see reports of 'false positives' on this mailing list. Not to mention my first experience with this patch it wasn't even a unified diff, therefore I had to apply it against a fresh qmail tarball and make a real diff out of it before I could apply it against the qmail tarball I was building. I don't like how it determines the 'catchall' either, however, that's not a problem with the patch, that's a problem with how vpopmail determines how it's supposed to handle deliveries to unknown user accounts/aliases. -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen ++ Systems Administrator ++ Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ++ www.inter7.com ++ 866.528.3530 ++ 847.492.0470 int'l kitchen @ #qmail #gentoo on EFnet ++ scriptkitchen.com/qmail
Re: [vchkpw] howto block incoming mails for a vhost
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On May 27, 2004, at 10:06 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I want to block a vhost with about 100 pop3-Accounts, but dont want to delete this vhost with vpopmail. - qmail dont shell deliver to this vhosts the incoming emails. Do someone know what its the best way to do it? Can I manipulate a control file to do it best? Does vpopmail work with the other domains with no problem? You should be able to edit the ~vpopmail/domains/whatever.com/.qmail-default file. Assuming you want all of the mail to bounce until you reactive the domain, you should add a line like this to the top of the .qmail-default file: |/var/qmail/bin/bouncesaying Domain is currently disabled You can leave the rest of the file as-is. Nothing else will be processed after bouncesaying, and when you're ready to turn the domain back on, you can just delete the bouncesaying line. There may also be .qmail-somethingelse files in that directory. If any of them to forward to accounts outside the disabled domain, you'd need to edit those files the same way to also disallow forwarding. Any files that forward back to an account in the disabled domain can be ignored as those messages will end up being processed by .qmail-default anyways. The man page for bouncesaying is online here if you're interested: http://www.qmail.org/man/man1/bouncesaying.html Best regards, Zac Bedell == You can tell the ideals of a nation by its advertisements. -- Norman Douglas - -- Brought to you by MacOS, running on host Aramis Running for: 21 hours, 15 minutes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkC2MIgACgkQq+EtLVpY/F7nsQCeJI2O/Tsezi7jXNVPx1EfJxvq I78AoJfelLlM8SP/ePDGiHPG/OHKZquY =pkMG -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [vchkpw] howto block incoming mails for a vhost
On Thursday 27 May 2004 1:16 pm, Zachary Bedell wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On May 27, 2004, at 10:06 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I want to block a vhost with about 100 pop3-Accounts, but dont want to delete this vhost with vpopmail. - qmail dont shell deliver to this vhosts the incoming emails. Do someone know what its the best way to do it? Can I manipulate a control file to do it best? Does vpopmail work with the other domains with no problem? You could also remove the domain from /var/qmail/control/rcpthosts Then qmail-smtpd will refuse to accept mail for that domain. Ken Jones
[vchkpw] Esporadic login faliures from webmail
Im setting up a new debian woody box, with vanilla imap (your, upstream courier imap) and ive been working on courier-imap on other woody boxes for the past 2 years. So im somehow experienced (though not much...). Okay, the problem is this. In my other woody box (running for ages) everything is running fine. In this new box, LOGIN to imap fails from time to time. First things first, this is the setup: courier-imap-2.2.1 vpopmail, vchkpwd 5.4.0 MAXPERIP (lost enough time learning two years ago about this one), is 400 but ive experimented with various values to no avail. Ive got the very same email client (phpgroupware's, of which i am a mantainer), working in the other box with the same version of courier imap and the same variables in imapd conf file. The only difference i can think of is hardware. This is a newer box with kernel 2.4 running with hyperthreading (2 processors, looks like 4), so maybe there is the problem? Memmory is 1 GB Im gonna go out on a limb and post the whole imapd and authdaemonrc files here. http://co.com.mx/~alex/imapd http://co.com.mx/~alex/imapd.rc http://co.com.mx/~alex/authdaemonrc Smtp is qmail, although i dont think it has anything to do with this. Any help is appreciated. Alejandro Borges [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sogrp.com begin:vcard fn:Alejandro Borges n:Borges;Alejandro email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.stepone.com.mx version:2.1 end:vcard
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 -0500, you wrote: On Thursday 27 May 2004 04:26 am, Tonix wrote: *ahem* +#include stdio.h *ahem* If you comment out this line, you have this compilation error: In file included from qmail-smtpd.c:45: /vpopmail/include/vpopmail.h:133: syntax error before `*' This is the guilty 133 line, inside vpopmail.h: struct vqpasswd *vgetent(FILE *); It looks like my patch needs stdio.h only because vpopmail needs it. So, does Ken know your opinion about his writing UGLY and HORRIBLE code with glibc-stuff inside? *ahem* This patch is running in hundreds of productions sites since more than two years (without a bug and without any performance problem), and I'm receiving dozen of e-mails, each month, thanking for it. I continually see reports of 'false positives' on this mailing list. This is a MySQL fault, with vpopmail NOT handling bad return codes in some core routines. I'll ask, nextly, to join the development group and develop a robust subset of calls solving this problem (for all, not only for chkuser). Not to mention my first experience with this patch it wasn't even a unified diff, therefore I had to apply it against a fresh qmail tarball and make a real diff out of it before I could apply it against the qmail tarball I was building. I'm not selling this patch, it is just a free patch. And you should know about patching patched sources... I don't like how it determines the 'catchall' either, however, that's not a problem with the patch, that's a problem with how vpopmail determines how it's supposed to handle deliveries to unknown user accounts/aliases. Thanks. Tonino -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen ++ Systems Administrator ++ Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ++ www.inter7.com ++ 866.528.3530 ++ 847.492.0470 int'l kitchen @ #qmail #gentoo on EFnet ++ scriptkitchen.com/qmail [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On May 27, 2004, at 4:54 AM, Linux-Guru wrote: I found a patch [1] at [2] which enables qmail to first check against vpopmail if the user (email-address) is existant before accepting mail for it. Yesterday I asked in #qmail (IRC-channel) for any experiences and/or recommendations with this patch and have been told by Jeremy Kitchen that this patch is UGLY and HORRIBLE and has glibc-stuff in it. As he seems to have a little bit more experience than me, I trust him. :-) [1] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/easy-way-1.0.patch [2] http://www.interazioni.it/qmail/#qmail-smtpd Your message was oddly well timed! I was kind of debating whether to take the time to package my own patch up for the rest of the world, and I guess I might as well. I looked at the patches from interazioni.it, and was unable to get them to compile cleanly (on Gentoo i686). My qmail server serves a small ISP, and it had been dying under the load of unbouncable junk mail. We actually just upgraded the hardware rather significantly, and while I had the chance, I built my own pre-checking scripts for qmail/vpopmail. I used the GPL'd patches from interazioni.it as inspiration and to get an idea of how to go about hacking what I needed into qmail-smtpd.c. You can find my patches along with detailed descriptions here: https://mail.adirondack.net/?p20 These patches don't have any glibc stuff in them, and they do check for catch-all aliases. Best regards, Zac Bedell == pain, n.: Sliding down a 50-foot razor blade into a bucket of alcohol. - -- Brought to you by MacOS, running on host Aramis Running for: 21 hours, 23 minutes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkC2XpUACgkQq+EtLVpY/F5zPQCgwGqqAez+XZ+hNZtTsGMxzlb7 6VsAn23VQ73Kw4Y3tKBUSVn4X5LM00Jn =t++j -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: I'll ask, nextly, to join the development group and develop a robust subset of calls solving this problem (for all, not only for chkuser). Help on vpopmail would be welcome, at least by me, [1] but creating another set of calls is not a good way to handle this problem. As I recall, a major part of your complaint was that you could not tell the difference between not being able to open the database and getting a no answer back from that database. I have already corrected that problem by providing a vauth_open() in every back end. Any program can now verify access to the back end, and most of the ones in ~/vpopmail/bin already do. (This is only in CVS so far. A dev release is in the works...) Please sign up to the SourceFORGE vpopmail list to continue this discussion... http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vpopmail-devel Rick [1] I'm not the one who decides.
Re: [vchkpw] Esporadic login faliures from webmail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On May 27, 2004, at 2:48 PM, Alex Borges wrote: Im setting up a new debian woody box, with vanilla imap (your, upstream courier imap) and ive been working on courier-imap on other woody boxes for the past 2 years. So im somehow experienced (though not much...). Okay, the problem is this. In my other woody box (running for ages) everything is running fine. In this new box, LOGIN to imap fails from time to time. http://co.com.mx/~alex/authdaemonrc Just a wild guess, but try increasing the daemons setting in authdaemonrc. According to the comments in that file: # You may need to increase daemons if as your system load increases. Symptoms # include sporadic authentication failures. If you start getting # authentication failures, increase daemons. However, the default of 5 # SHOULD be sufficient. Bumping up daemon count is only a short-term # solution. The permanent solution is to add more resources: RAM, faster # disks, faster CPUs... Seems like you've got more than enough RAM, CPU, etc, but maybe it's worth a shot? Good luck! Best regards, Zac Bedell == Brought to you by MacOS, running on host Aramis Running for: 1 hours, 25 minutes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkC2YSwACgkQq+EtLVpY/F4ztACfWEg0udmLoJfWd/VTZu1sWDXg YaUAoL9pmKsYLlVBkj+bkB8Q1p38qwnk =ldRZ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 -0400, you wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 These patches don't have any glibc stuff in them, and they do check for catch-all aliases. Sorry for being picky, but my patch has not internal glibc stuff inside... Just it must call vpopmail, who has glib stuff inside. You patch also is running glibc stuff when executing vpopmail code (internal or external). Anyway, welcome aboard. Ciao, Tonino [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vchkpw] RE:[vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 -0600, you wrote: tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: I'll ask, nextly, to join the development group and develop a robust subset of calls solving this problem (for all, not only for chkuser). Help on vpopmail would be welcome, at least by me, [1] but creating another set of calls is not a good way to handle this problem. As I recall, a major part of your complaint was that you could not tell the difference between not being able to open the database and getting a no answer back from that database. I have already corrected that problem by providing a vauth_open() in every back end. Any program can now verify access to the back end, and most of the ones in ~/vpopmail/bin already do. (This is only in CVS so far. A dev release is in the works...) Please sign up to the SourceFORGE vpopmail list to continue this discussion... http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vpopmail-devel Rick Thanks Rick, I did not know of this new set. I'll update chkuser as this new version is available. Ciao, Tonino [EMAIL PROTECTED]Interazioni di Antonio Nati http://www.interazioni.it [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vchkpw] Making qmail check for existant user against vpopmail _before_ accepting mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On May 27, 2004, at 6:49 PM, tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: At 27/05/2004 27/05/2004 -0400, you wrote: These patches don't have any glibc stuff in them, and they do check for catch-all aliases. Sorry for being picky, but my patch has not internal glibc stuff inside... Just it must call vpopmail, who has glib stuff inside. You patch also is running glibc stuff when executing vpopmail code (internal or external). True. I may have used poor wording on that. I was referring to the includes to stdio.h and stdlib.h added to qmail-smtpd.c which seem to be the cause of some controversy 'round these parts. =) Anyway, welcome aboard. Many thanks! And also, many thanks for your work. I wouldn't have had a clue without it. Best regards, Zac Bedell == Brought to you by MacOS, running on host Aramis Running for: 1 hours, 57 minutes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAkC2aRIACgkQq+EtLVpY/F6f8ACgkrGSWcJF/eDfGK0hXbj09XUM ycwAoPmi2c6E6zg0Ru6sDGcf7S8QVEm0 =0Zw2 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [vchkpw] Strange Error
At 25/05/04 18:44 (), François Wautier wrote: Hi, I am new to this list. I recently installed on a Gentoo linux qmail 1.03 (r13) vpopmail 5.4.0 maildrop 1.5.3 qmail-scanner 1.16 ( With some modifs) Everything was working well until today. Today, I took my local domain and made it a virtual domain on my hosts. Things are mostly working, but every now and then I get the following error message @400040b3436602b4f094 delivery 2035: success: vmysql:_sql_error[1]:_Can't_create_database_'vpopmail'._Database_exists/vmysql:_sql_error[3]: _No_Database_Selected/could_not_create_limits_table_CREATE_TABLE_limits_(_d The whole SQL query.. _No_Database_Selected/user_does_not_exist,but_will_deliver_to_/var/vpopmail/domains/mydomain/mycatchall/ Because I have a catchall account, the emails get delivered there instead of the correct mailbox. I can see that the Delivered-To header is set to the correct user. I can't seem to find a pattern in the occurrence of the problem The only thing is that I get the feeling it is related to the use of aliases ( .qmaol-myalias) but I am not sure. Has anyone experienced the same problem? Has anyone found a solution? Thanks François Wautier I too see this problem from time to time on two different Servers. But, to date I have not been able to understand the Problem. Devendra Singh __ Devendra Singh IndiaMART InterMESH Limited (Global Gateway to Indian Market Place) B-1, Sector 8, Noida, UP - 201301, India EPABX : +91-120-2424945, +91-120-3094634, +91-9810646342 Fax: +91-120-2424943 http://www.indiamart.com http://www.indiangiftsportal.com http://www.indiantravelportal.com __
