| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3
Comments:
<0> Has anyone got a pam module they use when migrating from one authentication store to another?
<0> So I can for instance, when someone logs in, have it update the p***word in the new store for a period of time before the new one is activated, and the old one removed?
<0> an perl hook or something would be neat.
<0> not really posfix related specifically
<0> Hmm found pam_make
<1> Hmmm
<1> Anyone know why postfix.admin makes an entry in both the mailbox table, and then doubles over creating an alias with the same address and goto in the alias table?
<2> does anyone here know if the FC4 rpm of postfix includes support for PostgreSQL?
<1> You have to re-compile. Try #fedora. They can most definately help you with that. :)
<1> Oh, MysticOne! Haven't seen you in a while. ;}
<2> just thought I'd ask if anyone in here had experience with it first :)
<2> I lay low most of the time nowadays :)
<1> The only rpm I found for FC4 for Postfix, includes LDAP support. :)
<2> yeah, I don't use LDAP hehe
<1> Yeah. I do. ;)
<2> hehe
<1> But, I don't use FC.
<1> Friend of mine, whom I co-admin his box for, does, though.
<1> MysticOne: Believe it or not, though, the #fedora guys, are actually rather usefully helpful at times.
<2> I wouldn't use FC if I could help it, but not much of a choice at the moment
<2> yeah, I go in there from time to time ... I think it just depends on who is around :)
<1> But yeah, basically your best bet, is to use an srpm.
<1> I'll have to be doing that myself, for that FC4 system I work on, to re-build it with mysql support.
<2> the system I'm using now (another FC4 box) I just built it all from source
<1> i'm hacking up postfix.admin to support cyrus and mbox mailstores.
<2> but it's a nightmare sometimes trying to remember what to upgrade/patch depending on how I built what when :)
<3> With KDE 3.5, the window/pager keeps moving around and sometimes I also accident "drag" a window in the pager somewhere else, it is driving me up the wall! How do I turn this off? I want the pager to stay in the same place no matter what and I don't want to be able to drag icons (windows) around within the pager, is this possible?
<3> oops wrong chan
<1> Right now, postfix.admin ONLY supports Maildir-style mailboxes.
<1> war92: Yeah.. I'll say!
<2> question, why is it that you may want to keep sendmail binaries around?
<1> MysticOne: No clue.
<1> Sorry, been programming. ;)
<2> lol
<2> whatcha writing?
<1> Hacking up postfix.admin actually, to include mbox and cyrus mailbox transport support, instead of Maildir-only.
<2> oh yeah, forgot you said you were doing that
<1> So far, postfix.admin's one of the best web-based postfix tools I've ever seen. it's just.. Very specific. heh
<2> sorta
<2> :)
<2> I'm sure it's pretty basic
<1> Later on, I might even go as far as to make it support ldap as well. :)_
<4> keep sendmail binaries around?
<2> lunaphyte: yeah
<4> where'd you hear that?
<2> in the documentation for postfix? :)
<2> quoting ... (4 lines)
<2> IMPORTANT: if you are REPLACING an existing Sendmail installation with Postfix,
<2> you may need to keep the old sendmail program running for some time in order to
<2> flush the mail queue. As superuser, execute the following commands (your
<2> sendmail, newaliases and mailq programs may be in a different place):
<2> and then it has commands for moving the binaries
<4> ooohh.. sure - but not forever.
<2> ohhh, maybe it should say not forever :)
<1> Heh
<4> it does - "for some time"
<4> just a backup for a f*ckup, that's all.
<1> MysticOne: Well, it does say, "... you may need to keep the old sendmail running for some time..."
<1> heh
<1> Hmm
<1> What all kind of transports does postfix have? local, relay, lmtp, virtual, smtp, etc?
<4> uucp
<1> Oh wait, that's in the master.cf, isn't it?
<1> Or something.
<4> yes
<1> Much more than I generally use. heh
<2> so if I have sendmail installed via a package, I should theoretically be able to remove it once postfix is installed? (I doubt it'll let me anyway, though)
<1> MysticOne: Yep, and it should let you.
<4> force it.
<2> no, not going to force it ... all I need is to screw up the whole package database :) I figure some things make depend on sendmail or at least some MTA, and since I installed postfix from a tarball, it might not work for that...
<2> (in FC's eyes)
<4> if my distro was too stupid to virtualize an mta, i wouldn't use it.
<1> Ditto. :)
<1> Except, in the case of BSD. Which is a tottally different ballgame.
<2> mutt depends on sendmail, apparently :)
<2> so does fetchmail
<4> bsd is for gluttons for punishment :)
<1> lunaphyte: Actually, quite frankly, it's a better OS in many ways than Linux.
<2> I love me some FreeBSD
<4> Psi-Jack: i use it all the time
<2> but this isn't FreeBSD :(
<4> we sell products that run freebsd
<1> Hehe
<4> it's a pain in my ***, but it's right for the appplication
<1> I like FreeBSD 6.0's multi-threaded enhancements. Multi-threaded filesystem for crying out loud.
<1> Filesystem driver layer, that is. :)
<1> When Linux and fsutils come together to make them able to communicate with each other, properly, so that filesystems can be checked LIVE, I'll be much much happier with Linux, but not being able to fsck a live filesystem is just bad.
<1> And by live, I don't mean remounted ro, I mean fully live.
<5> hola
<5> speack spanish?
<5> hola
<5> sabe alguien de postfix
<1> No espanol.
<4> espanol es muy bueno!
<1> Hmm not a specific transport for alias, eh
<6> Hello. I just finished replacing the /var/spool on my server (my disk has started acting up). Now I get this message: "postqueue: fatal: Connect to the Postfix showq service: Permission denied" What do I need to do to get the mailq command to function again?
<6> Disregard. The permissions on /var/spool/postfix/public got messed up
<2> anyone here using courier-imap? I have mine running as the user "vmail", yet I can't for the life of me remember where I set that...
<2> n/m, figured it out :)
<7> smesjz!!!
<7> aww
<8> morning
<9> morn'n
<10> i'm trying to specify a content_filter with a null nexthop. afaik postfix should use the recipient's domain as the nexthop, but it's using myhostname.
<10> anyone have any ideas what is going on?
<11> postfix uses its hostname if nexthop isn't specified.
<10> the last message in this thread from Wietse suggested otherwise:
<10> http://groups.google.com/group/list.postfix.users/browse_frm/thread/ec2a4e2e96685a4d/abb0fe623d6ba2bd?lnk=st&q=postfix+smtp+smtp_bind_address+multiple&rnum=20&hl=en#abb0fe623d6ba2bd
<10> am i missing something, or was Wietse wrong to recommend that?
<12> when someone sends me mail they get this error...
<12> PERM_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 9): 554 <info@mydomain.co.uk>: Relay access denied
<11> aut: i don't see a mention of nexthop in that thread
<10> mjt: it doesn't mention it, but what wietse suggests wouldn't work unless nexthop was set to the recipient's domain
<10> (wouldn't work for remote recipients i mean)
<11> aha. got it.
<10> the transport table does what i want (according to the docs--havent tested it).. i don't see why content_filter would work any differently :(
<11> well.. the suggestion as i can think of looks somewhat strange
<11> it sure will break for mail with should NOT be delivered over smtp (like for locally hosted domains)
<12> PERM_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 9): 554 <info@mydomain.co.uk>: Relay access denied
<11> s/with/wich/
<11> Andy298: google will tell you this very question is waay too frequent
<11> Andy298: it's a bit boring to answer to it 10 times a day, really.
<10> mjt: im not sure i see why it would fail for local, but fortunately this is just a gateway so i dont have locally hosted domains
<10> mjt: do you know of any configuration options i can override to force it to set nexthop differently?
<11> default nexthop IS myhostname. proof is in qmgr source. So i don't know why Wietse made that suggestion.
<11> well let me check.. maybe something has changed in that area since i last looked at that code ;)
<11> ..nope, nothing changed in last several years ;)
<10> according to man postconf(5), content_filter uses the same syntax as the right side of the transport table
<11> yes
<11> it's just transport
<10> in the transport table,if you leave out nexthop, it is supposed to reset it to the recipient domain
<11> the thing is, the content_filter case is handled a bit differently in the code
<11> but another thing is, noone until now bothered with this nexthop thing
<11> *usually*, nexthop is irrelevant for content_filter
<10> yeah, it's a kludge :)
<11> else if (message->filter_xport) {
<10> i really wanted to use it to avoid running multiple instances. in a hosting environment, i may have to run many many instances to achieve the smtp_bind_address stuff
<11> if ((nexthop = split_at(STR(reply.transport), ':')) == 0
<11> || *nexthop == 0)
<11> nexthop = var_myhostname;
<10> doh :)
<11> note this is only when message->filter_xport is set (it's the value of content_filter)
<10> yeah, and changing that now would be incompatible with previous configs
<11> for the rest of cases, nexthop is set to either the transport:nexthop thing or to the restination domain.
<11> i don't think it really matters
<11> that 'compatibility'
<11> and i can't justify this to be a bug or not
<10> i meant if you stop setting nexthop to myhostname, then people's filters wont work as expected.. they would need to set their content_filter with transport:$myhostname
<11> in almost all cases the nexthop thing is irrelevant for content filter
Return to
#postfix
or
Go to some related
logs:
emerge downgrade dhcpcd
libusb ti84+
#perl
#lgp
#php
unknown key pressed e059 gentoo
smart suse remove kde
t
hauppauge hvr 1100 in mepis
evolution junk dapper
|
|