FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-16-2011, 11:19 PM
Don Armstrong
 
Default RFC: Making mail-transport-agent Priority: optional

On Sun, 16 Oct 2011, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 03:50:45PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > 1: I should note that I personally use a custom written nullmailer
> > plugin which uses ssh to connect to my central mail host and then
> > run /usr/lib/sendmail there... granted, that's probably a little
> > bit crazy, but it works great for my laptops which are often
> > operating on networks which try do all sorts of crazy things to
> > outgoing mail. Some people on this list are probably doing other
> > similarly crazy things.
>
> Is the code for this plugin available anywhere?

http://svn.donarmstrong.com/don/trunk/bin/sshsendmail

Stick it in /usr/lib/nullmailer/sshsendmail, then add something like:

foohost.com sshsendmail --identity=/var/mail/.ssh/id_rsa --username remotemail --sendmail-options='-baruser@foohost.com'

to /etc/nullmailer/remotes.

Unfortunately, it's not terribly well documented, because I wrote it
specifically for my craziness, and not for general consumption. [You
can easily see the operation of it and hack it for your purposes,
though.]


Don Armstrong

--
I will not make any deals with you. I've resigned. I will not be
pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My
life is my own. I resign.
-- Patrick McGoohan as Number 6 in "The Prisoner"

http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20111016231910.GD10653@teltox.donarmstrong.com">ht tp://lists.debian.org/20111016231910.GD10653@teltox.donarmstrong.com
 
Old 10-17-2011, 07:42 AM
Simon McVittie
 
Default RFC: Making mail-transport-agent Priority: optional

On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 at 13:23:00 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Do you mean [...] the
> envelope icon Gnome3 adds that holds such important info like the last song
> that started playing (used to OSD for a couple of seconds), or that you got
> new mail (no matter it's already shown elsewhere, and the mail is long read
> and gone).

When you say "GNOME 3" are you thinking of Unity, Ubuntu's ironically-named
GNOME 3 competitor? This sounds like a description of the Messaging Menu
in Unity.

S


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20111017074221.GA30037@reptile.pseudorandom.co.uk" >http://lists.debian.org/20111017074221.GA30037@reptile.pseudorandom.co.uk


Mon Oct 17 11:30:02 2011
Return-path: <centos-bounces@centos.org>
Envelope-to: tom@linux-archive.org
Delivery-date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:38:13 +0300
Received: from mail.centos.org ([72.26.200.202]:36208)
by s2.java-tips.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <centos-bounces@centos.org>)
id 1RFhm1-0003nb-6i
for tom@linux-archive.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:38:13 +0300
Received: from mail.centos.org (voxeldev.centos.org [127.0.0.1])
by mail.centos.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04D156F696;
Mon, 17 Oct 2011 03:47:55 -0400 (EDT)
X-Original-To: centos@centos.org
Delivered-To: centos@centos.org
Received: from carmen.lorenzomartinez.es
(36.Red-88-12-11.staticIP.rima-tde.net [88.12.11.36])
by mail.centos.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C47F96F67D
for <centos@centos.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 03:47:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (qmail 24050 invoked by uid 7797); 17 Oct 2011 07:47:53 -0000
Received: from 192.168.52.133 by Carmen (envelope-from
<lorenzo@lorenzomartinez.es>, uid 500) with qmail-scanner-2.08
(clamdscan: 0.97.2/13407. Clear:RC:1(192.168.52.133):.
Processed in 0.018141 secs); 17 Oct 2011 07:47:53 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO LawBook.local) (192.168.52.133)
by Carmen with (DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA encrypted) SMTP;
17 Oct 2011 07:47:53 -0000
Message-ID: <4E9BDDAA.1010402@lorenzomartinez.es>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:47:54 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lorenzo_Mart=EDnez_Rodr=EDguez?=
<lorenzo@lorenzomartinez.es>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6;
rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: CentOS mailing list <centos@centos.org>
References: <B1B0B93C9EDC45A98D692DB63F8A0DED@palmettodomains. com> <4E9A2EB9.9040802@alteeve.com> <alpine.LRH.2.00.1110152144180.23190@www.rossberry .com> <4E9A985A.2000001@lorenzomartinez.es> <4E9AD01E.7010000@puzzled.xs4all.nl>
<4E9AE2C2.4080200@lorenzomartinez.es>
<4E9AECA3.1090105@puzzled.xs4all.nl>
In-Reply-To: <4E9AECA3.1090105@puzzled.xs4all.nl>
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: Re: [CentOS] What's up with the mailing list?
X-BeenThere: centos@centos.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: CentOS mailing list <centos@centos.org>
List-Id: CentOS mailing list <centos.centos.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos>,
<mailto:centos-request@centos.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos>
List-Post: <mailto:centos@centos.org>
List-Help: <mailto:centos-request@centos.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos>,
<mailto:centos-request@centos.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: centos-bounces@centos.org
Errors-To: centos-bounces@centos.org


Hi Patrick,

It is detected and working now if I use kernel =

2.6.32-71.29.1.el6.x86_64. The problem comes if Update to kernel =

2.6.32-131.17.1.el6 from *cr* repository.
I will try to send the bug to the link you sent.

Thanks a lot,

El 16/10/11 16:39, Patrick Lists escribi=F3:
> On 10/16/2011 03:57 PM, Lorenzo Mart=EDnez Rodr=EDguez wrote:
> [snip]
>>> If you need it for a printer then why not get a usb<->parallel cable:
>>> http://www.lindy.co.uk/usb-to-parallel-printer-port-adapter-cable-15m/4=
2882.html
>>>
>>> Maybe this is the difference
>> Following your link I only see "Compatible with Windows
>> ME/2000/XP/Vista/7" Are you sure it will work with CentOS 6? I don't use
>> it for print anything, but just to switch on my own home alarm as I
>> wrote here:
>> http://www.securitybydefault.com/2011/04/trasteando-con-una-alarma-de-se=
curitas.html
>> Sorry, it is in spanish, that's my language Give it a try with some
>> online translation service.
> Nope I don't know if it will work with CentOS 6. I looked at your page.
> I don't speak Spanish but got the idea. Pretty neat.
>
> [snip]
>> If you don't expect anything from somebody, and you receive anything,...
>> it would be very pleasant. Since I belong to this list, the only topic
>> with 0 answers was my question. Is it so difficult?
> Well now at least you got 2
>
> Have you tried getting the latest Fedora 15 live cd (or maybe even the
> latest Fedora 16 beta/TC live cd) and boot that on your server and see
> if your card is recognized? That should give you some more info. Then
> file a bug at the CentOS website or maybe directly on the Red Hat
> bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com
>
> If your card is not recognized in the latest CentOS CR kernel and in F15
> (or F16) then you could file the bug twice (under RHEL6 and F15/F16).
> Hopefully that should get the kernel devs attention.
>
> If you can find such a usb<->parallel cable at a local computer store
> perhaps you could try it and return it if it does not work?
>
> Regards,
> Patrick
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>


-- =



Lorenzo Martinez Rodriguez

Visit me: http://www.lorenzomartinez.es
Mail me to: lorenzo@lorenzomartinez.es
My blog: http://www.securitybydefault.com
My twitter: @lawwait
PGP Fingerprint: 97CC 2584 7A04 B2BA 00F1 76C9 0D76 83A2 9BBC BDE2

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 10-17-2011, 07:50 AM
Simon McVittie
 
Default RFC: Making mail-transport-agent Priority: optional

On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 at 16:09:50 +0100, Roger Lynn wrote:
> On 15/10/11 22:00, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Every ISP mailserver I've seen, and for that matter almost every other
> > mailserver I've seen, requires SMTP AUTH to send mail; the SMTP AUTH
> > credentials vary by user.
>
> I don't believe this is usually the case in the UK. Most mailservers
> (both in ISPs and elsewhere) will usually allow unauthenticated
> connections from machines connected to their networks. Only if they
> allow users to send mail from elsewhere will they require SMTP AUTH.

... so on a typical laptop, you need to remember to set up SMTP AUTH if
you will ever send mail from not-your-house (e.g. a public wifi or 3G
connection).

S


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20111017075002.GB30037@reptile.pseudorandom.co.uk" >http://lists.debian.org/20111017075002.GB30037@reptile.pseudorandom.co.uk
 
Old 10-17-2011, 02:33 PM
Luca Capello
 
Default RFC: Making mail-transport-agent Priority: optional

Hi there!

Disclaimer: I am not an SMTP expert.

On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 21:37:59 +0200, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Andrea Bolognani wrote:
>> The proxy one needs to go through to access the Internet from inside my
>> University buildings cuts off SMTP.
>
> Have you checked to see if it blocks SMTPS, or the submission port?
> The latter often gets through when port 25 won't, and SMTPS almost
> always works.

Andrea, if you need to ask, please do for the submission port [1][2]
with STARTTLS. AFAIK there is no sense for SMTPS nowadays, and the fact
that port 465 has been assigned to something else [3] and that some MTA
do not support it are signs already in disfavor of SMTPS [4][5].

[1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_submission_agent>
[2] <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4409.txt>
[3] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMTPS>
[4] <http://www.postfix.org/TLS_README.html#client_smtps>
[5] <http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/604>

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca
 
Old 10-17-2011, 05:20 PM
Luca Capello
 
Default RFC: Making mail-transport-agent Priority: optional

Hi there!

Just some small notes without re-iterating what other people already
wrote in this (now too-long) thread.

On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 10:26:06 +0200, Jonas Meurer wrote:
> Am 12.10.2011 23:39, schrieb Josh Triplett:
>> Not every system needs an MTA, and I'd argue that today most systems
>> don't.
[...]
> I agree with the counter-arguments in this thread, that a default UNIX
> server setup should contain an MTA. This also is true for desktop
> systems of advanced UNIX sysadmins.

I think that the real question is: how much should Debian GNU/Linux
mimic a standard UNIX system by default?

> But if Debian cares about desktop users which don't know the internals
> of a Linux/UNIX system, we need to accept that they have a very
> different vision of a default installation. For them a system should be
> kept easy, with as few daemons as possible.

I do not see why a system with a lot of daemons should not be considered
easy or, IOW, the two things are not mutually self-exclusive.

> For them things like power consumption and RAM usage of default
> systems count much more than whether the system has all required
> elements of a standard UNIX system.

As Steve already pointed out [1], there is user-friendly software bigger
and more memory-eater than MTAs. I run Postfix on my laptop [2] and
have no problem using it [my laptop] for ~3h on battery, but as soon as
I start XULrunner everything changes [3] (and I do not use any fancy DE,
simply ratpoison, screen and Emacs).

[1] <http://lists.debian.org/20111015193508.GE5495%40virgil.dodds.net>
[2] except for the SSD, my laptop is "old" (mostly 5-year-old)
<http://bugs.debian.org/600671>
[3] <http://bugs.debian.org/641541>

> To make my point clear: I'm much in favour of supporting default
> installations without a MTA.

Just to be clear as well: I am not.

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca
 
Old 10-17-2011, 06:04 PM
Josselin Mouette
 
Default RFC: Making mail-transport-agent Priority: optional

Le dimanche 16 octobre 2011 à 02:41 +0100, Ben Hutchings a écrit :
> > That's the main one that I'd worry about. Also overheating warnings, for
> > which even the home user can do something immediately.
>
> The user generally can't even read the warning in time to make a
> decision; the system must handle OOM or over-temperature quickly.

Actually some cases of overheating have to be handled by hardware, since
CPUs can heat so quickly (e.g. in case of a detached cooler) they will
be damaged before they can even switch states. For HDDs or some other
pieces, it would still be interesting.

> However, the user should be notified about that decision, if possible.

Agreed. It would be nice to have a kernel interface to be notified of
such things, since the syslog sounds like a poor way of doing it.

--
.'`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'
`-
 
Old 10-18-2011, 12:26 AM
"brian m. carlson"
 
Default RFC: Making mail-transport-agent Priority: optional

On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 07:20:54PM +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
> I think that the real question is: how much should Debian GNU/Linux
> mimic a standard UNIX system by default?

I think this is the real question. If standard is a default Unix
system, then it needs to have an MTA. I believe this even though I do
not use an MTA on most of my systems (and I always use something other
than Exim). I'd also like to point out that if we don't ship an MTA in
standard, we should also not ship nfs-common, rpcbind, or libtirpc since
NFS is used even less often than an MTA and the same rationale for not
installing it applies.

--
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
+1 832 623 2791 | http://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187
 
Old 10-18-2011, 03:59 AM
Clint Adams
 
Default RFC: Making mail-transport-agent Priority: optional

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:26:12AM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
> standard, we should also not ship nfs-common, rpcbind, or libtirpc since
> NFS is used even less often than an MTA and the same rationale for not
> installing it applies.

Those seem like reasonable things to drop, though I don't think any of
those are likely to fill /var up with emails that most users will never
read or even be aware of.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20111018035923.GA24104@scru.org">http://lists.debian.org/20111018035923.GA24104@scru.org
 
Old 10-18-2011, 03:59 AM
Clint Adams
 
Default RFC: Making mail-transport-agent Priority: optional

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:26:12AM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
> standard, we should also not ship nfs-common, rpcbind, or libtirpc since
> NFS is used even less often than an MTA and the same rationale for not
> installing it applies.

Those seem like reasonable things to drop, though I don't think any of
those are likely to fill /var up with emails that most users will never
read or even be aware of.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20111018035923.GA24104@scru.org">http://lists.debian.org/20111018035923.GA24104@scru.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:39 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org