From bluria at gmail.com  Tue Feb  1 15:59:55 2011
From: bluria at gmail.com (Brian Luria)
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 09:59:55 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Changing the name of a mailing list
Message-ID: <AANLkTik5KNn4jBpPRVR3nBzPWBzQv1prFuBQGEOMHHPr@mail.gmail.com>

If I have a list called "name at domain.com" and I want to change it to
something else, say "namesake at domain.com"  - is there a relatively easy way
to do this for someone not versed in the server side of managing the mailman
install?

Thanks, as always, in advance

Brian

From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Feb  1 19:43:46 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 10:43:46 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Changing the name of a mailing list
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik5KNn4jBpPRVR3nBzPWBzQv1prFuBQGEOMHHPr@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <PC195201102011043460312397e75a6@MSAPIRO>

Brian Luria wrote:

>If I have a list called "name at domain.com" and I want to change it to
>something else, say "namesake at domain.com"  - is there a relatively easy way
>to do this for someone not versed in the server side of managing the mailman
>install?


The various ways to "rename" a list are described in the FAQ at
<http://wiki.list.org/x/mYA9>. The only way to truly rename the list
(i.e. change its name while preserving list membership and all member
options) requires renaming several files and directories in Mailman's
file structure and possibly modifying the MTAs aliases. This and other
methods are described in the FAQ.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From pennguin at mac.com  Tue Feb  1 22:05:31 2011
From: pennguin at mac.com (Rob)
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 16:05:31 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Emergency Moderate question
Message-ID: <4148AD50-5789-4D84-83D1-663A5527BF62@mac.com>

I am running v2.1.13 on Mac OS X Server 10.5.8; all works well, I have many lists running with virtual hosts for several organizations.

I noticed a strange behavior recently. One list was set to "Emergency Moderate" all traffic. For this one list, I (as administrator) did not receive the customary notification of held e-mails until the following day, when the daily reminder message would notify me that the message was still waiting to be approved/denied. 

Turning off "Emergency Moderate" restored behavior to normal, and I now receive immediate notification of held posts. 

All other lists work fine with respect to moderated / held messages, none of them have 'Emergency Moderate' on.

I am trying to understand this behavior and was curious if anyone had any thoughts.

Thanks,

-Rob



From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Feb  1 22:28:48 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 13:28:48 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Emergency Moderate question
In-Reply-To: <4148AD50-5789-4D84-83D1-663A5527BF62@mac.com>
Message-ID: <PC195201102011328480906ca9519fa@MSAPIRO>

Rob wrote:
>
>I noticed a strange behavior recently. One list was set to "Emergency Moderate" all traffic. For this one list, I (as administrator) did not receive the customary notification of held e-mails until the following day, when the daily reminder message would notify me that the message was still waiting to be approved/denied. 



That's how it's designed to work. Emergency moderation is designed to
be used to moderate all traffic in emergencies such as to quell flame
wars. It is not intended to be used routinely to moderate all posts.

Thus, when emergency moderation is on, posts which are not held for
some other reason are held for emergency moderation and the
owner/moderator is not notified even if admin_immed_notify is yes.


>Turning off "Emergency Moderate" restored behavior to normal, and I now receive immediate notification of held posts. 


Unless there is an Apple mod in the order of the pipeline, you should
have received notices of posts held for other than emergency
moderation anyway. The only held posts that you would not receive
notice for are those specifically held for emergency moderation.


>All other lists work fine with respect to moderated / held messages, none of them have 'Emergency Moderate' on.
>
>I am trying to understand this behavior and was curious if anyone had any thoughts.


If you want to routinely hold all posts, the way to do that is to set
all member's 'mod' flags on and set new members moderated by default.
Under normal circumstannces, emergency moderation should be off.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From malcolm.austen at weald.org.uk  Tue Feb  1 22:10:37 2011
From: malcolm.austen at weald.org.uk (Malcolm Austen)
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 21:10:37 -0000
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Emergency Moderate question
In-Reply-To: <4148AD50-5789-4D84-83D1-663A5527BF62@mac.com>
References: <4148AD50-5789-4D84-83D1-663A5527BF62@mac.com>
Message-ID: <op.vp8s3ycpg14ka7@malcolm-rebuild>

On Tue, 01 Feb 2011 21:05:31 -0000, Rob <pennguin at mac.com> wrote:

> I am trying to understand this behavior and was curious if anyone had  
> any thoughts.

I saw exactly the same behaviour a month or two back, then I read the  
manual that confirmed this is as intended - to avoid the moderator getting  
floods of email during emergency moderation.

Malcolm.

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

From pennguin at mac.com  Tue Feb  1 22:51:30 2011
From: pennguin at mac.com (Rob)
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 16:51:30 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Emergency Moderate question
In-Reply-To: <PC195201102011328480906ca9519fa@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC195201102011328480906ca9519fa@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <7476DDF1-BD98-43E2-B73F-FA63F9B503F8@mac.com>


On Feb 1, 2011, at 4:28 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:

> Rob wrote:
>> 
>> I noticed a strange behavior recently. One list was set to "Emergency Moderate" all traffic. For this one list, I (as administrator) did not receive the customary notification of held e-mails until the following day, when the daily reminder message would notify me that the message was still waiting to be approved/denied. 
> 
> 
> 
> That's how it's designed to work. Emergency moderation is designed to
> be used to moderate all traffic in emergencies such as to quell flame
> wars. It is not intended to be used routinely to moderate all posts.
> 
> Thus, when emergency moderation is on, posts which are not held for
> some other reason are held for emergency moderation and the
> owner/moderator is not notified even if admin_immed_notify is yes.
> 
> 
>> Turning off "Emergency Moderate" restored behavior to normal, and I now receive immediate notification of held posts. 
> 
> 
> Unless there is an Apple mod in the order of the pipeline, you should
> have received notices of posts held for other than emergency
> moderation anyway. The only held posts that you would not receive
> notice for are those specifically held for emergency moderation.
> 
> 
>> All other lists work fine with respect to moderated / held messages, none of them have 'Emergency Moderate' on.
>> 
>> I am trying to understand this behavior and was curious if anyone had any thoughts.
> 
> 
> If you want to routinely hold all posts, the way to do that is to set
> all member's 'mod' flags on and set new members moderated by default.
> Under normal circumstannces, emergency moderation should be off.

Thanks, that is what I normally do, and is how I have the list set up now. 

So, if I do use Emergency moderate in the future, would I just check the pending requests page manually to see if posts have arrived? 

-Rob


From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb  2 00:19:35 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 15:19:35 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Emergency Moderate question
In-Reply-To: <7476DDF1-BD98-43E2-B73F-FA63F9B503F8@mac.com>
Message-ID: <PC195201102011519350109cb2f1450@MSAPIRO>

Rob wrote:
>
>So, if I do use Emergency moderate in the future, would I just check the pending requests page manually to see if posts have arrived? 


If you wanted to know what was waiting moderation before receiving your
daily notice, yes.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb  2 00:45:50 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 15:45:50 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Administrivia Messages
In-Reply-To: <5aa88b95d374f65c1545db6a6a5a9b2d.squirrel@midge.lookhosting.com>
Message-ID: <PC195201102011545500062c3d60af0@MSAPIRO>

Beau Barnhart wrote:
>
>We have been asked by mail-abuse.org to make changes to the configuration
>to one of our servers.  The following this their request...


Actually, the request understates the problem. See below.


>-- message from mail-abuse.org ----------
>
>Currently, when messages arrive at your mail server it runs them through
>SpamAssassin, which checks for spam and tags them. Your mail server then
>passes this tagged message to mailman.
>
>Because it is to a -request address, mailman "knows" that these messages
>should contain commands.  It ignores the fact that SpamAssassin has
>already tagged it (Subject: {Definitely Spam?}), and looks through every
>line looking for a "subscribe", "unsubscribe" or other command.
>
>Of course, it doesn't find one.  So, it builds up a helpful reply, sets
>the X-Administrivia header to yes, and appends the original message, and
>forwards this to the From: address.
>
>Except that the From: address is forged, so the message, and its spam
>payload, get sent to an innocent third party.


And, this would occur even if spamassassin/MailScanner/whatever didn't
tag the subject. In fact, if the message is truly spam with a forged
From:, the likelyhood that the subject contained a valid command
before tagging is small. And even if it did contain a valid command,
there is normally some reply from Mailman to the (forged) sender in
any case.

This backscatter problem is well known, and it is a serious issue.
Mailman 3 will address this to some degree.


>Please properly configure your mailing list software to send list
>administrivia _only_ to a local administrator, or configure it not to send
>to forged From: addresses.  In general, there is no need for "list
>administrivia" - it was an artifact of some of the original list
>management software.  It does not serve a useful purpose today.
>
>----------------------------
>
>Actually we use administrivia in custom scripts and don't want to disable
>it.  We even have members that still use the request commands.
>
>I've searched the mailman wiki as well as the mailman-users archive and
>have not been able to find how to configure the administrivia recipient.
>
>Any help would be appreciated.


There's not much you can do in Mailman 2.1.x, at least as far as
configuration options go. You can disable the administrative
addresses, but you say you don't want to do that. Changing the
disposition of replies or their content requires code modification.

I really should implement a site option to not include original message
content in auto responses. I meant to do it before now, but haven't.
Maybe I can get to it for 2.1.15.

For more on this issue, see the thread "before next release: disable
backscatter in default installation" beginning at
<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-developers/2008-March/019804.html>.

One thing you can do is configure your MTA to not accept likely spam at
SMTP time or simply discard (not reject) it if it was already
accepted, or maybe do this only for Mailman recipient addresses if you
don't want to do it universally. If you use MailScanner, it shouldn't
be too difficult to concoct an appropriate rule set for this.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb  2 00:51:42 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 15:51:42 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Cannot exec /etc/mail/smrsh: Permission denied
In-Reply-To: <4D43217D.3080909@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <PC195201102011551420375c3d60c21@MSAPIRO>

John Espiro wrote:

>When I send a message to the mailing list I get:
>
> sm-mta[16327]: p0SJuInx016321: SYSERR(root): Cannot exec
>/etc/mail/smrsh: Permission denied
>Jan 28 19:56:22 sm-mta[16326]: p0SJuInx016321:
>to="|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post LISTNAME", ctladdr=<ADDRESS>
>(8/0), delay=00:00:01, xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=prog, pri=31689,
>dsn=4.0.0, stat=Operating system error
>
>System: Ubuntu 10.10 Server 64bit
>
>I've read through this:
>
>http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-install/node32.html
>
>grep smrsh /etc/mail/sendmail.cf
>#####  $Id: smrsh.m4,v 8.14 1999/11/18 05:06:23 ca Exp $  #####
>Mprog,  P=/etc/mail/smrsh, F=lsDFM
>
>smrsh is in: :/usr/lib/sm.bin
>
>In /usr/lib/sm.bin, I ran: ln -s /usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman mailman
>In /etc/mail/smrsh, I ran: ln -s /usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman mailman
>
>
>Still, the problem persists.  I am sure this must be a permissions
>issue, then again, maybe not.
>
>Other data:
>uid=51(smmsp) gid=51(smmsp) groups=51(smmsp),45(sasl)
>uid=103(smmta) gid=106(smmta) groups=106(smmta),45(sasl)
>uid=8(mail) gid=8(mail) groups=8(mail)
>
>ls -la /etc/mail/smrsh
>drwsr-sr-x 2 root  root  4096 2011-01-28 19:31 .


What are the permissions on /usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman? are all
directories world searchable and the file world executable?


-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From doug.gaff at gmail.com  Wed Feb  2 05:59:48 2011
From: doug.gaff at gmail.com (Doug Gaff)
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 23:59:48 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Private Lists with Real Name Signatures
Message-ID: <4d48e4dd.9259e60a.316e.76d8@mx.google.com>

Hi all,

I thought I'd send a summary of this in case anyone else needs to do it.
Thanks to Mark for basically explaining all of this to me.

As a reminder of my original request, I have one of my lists set up in
anonymous mode, but the list owner wants emails signed with "handles" used
by folks on the list. For example, "bikerchick21 says:" followed by the rest
of her message. When this anonymous list was setup, the owner put all of the
handles into the Real Name field for each subscriber in the subscriber list.
Now, I want to use this Real Name field in the msg_header variable on the
non-digest admin page. Here are the steps:

1. Create Fromvar.py (my choice for the handler name) in the
Mailman/Handlers directory. This code attempts to pull Real Name from the
subscriber list first by matching the from email address with the list. If
the mailman Real Name field is empty, it attempts to pull Real Name from the
sender's email address. (Customer handler FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/l4A9)
In the latter case my code just leaves the field blank to keep it either
handles or nothing.

from email.Utils import parseaddr
def process(mlist, msg, msgdata):
    from_name, addrs = parseaddr(msg['from'])
    if mlist.isMember(addrs):
        poster_name = mlist.getMemberName(addrs) or ''
    if not poster_name:
        poster_name = from_name
    msgdata.setdefault('decoration-data', {}).update(
                                  poster_name=poster_name)


2. Add this new handler to the global pipeline by editing the
Mailman/mm_cfg.py file at the end:

##################################################
# Put YOUR site-specific settings below this line.
GLOBAL_PIPELINE.insert(GLOBAL_PIPELINE.index('Cleanse'), 'Fromvar')


3. Stop and start mailman. If things worked, you'll have updated Fromvar.pyc
and mm_cfg.pyc files.


4. In the admin page under non-digest options, you can use "poster_name" in
the msg_header or msg_footer areas. To do the bikerchick21 example,
msg_header would have this:

%(poster_name)s says:


5. (Optional) When you Submit the change on the non-digest admin page,
you'll get a warning about "poster_name" being an illegal substitution
variable. You can ignore this, or you can change code in NonDigest.py. From
Mark:

Modify Mailman/Gui/NonDigest.py. after the lines

    def _setValue(self, mlist, property, val, doc):
        alloweds = list(ALLOWEDS)

add

        alloweds.append('poster_name')

If you make this change, stop/start mailman again. I can live with the
warning, so I didn't bother.


Finally, please note that HTML-formatted messages (e.g. from Outlook or
gmail interface) will have trouble with headers and footers as pointed out
in http://wiki.list.org/x/84A9. 

HTH,

Doug


From Jack.Madderra at tu.edu  Thu Feb  3 02:03:01 2011
From: Jack.Madderra at tu.edu (Jack R. Madderra)
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 17:03:01 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Umbrella list - sublist authentication for
	administrators
Message-ID: <531E1BA38BF1BC4A986D608ED41EA2370E761D243E@TUMAIL.tuca.touro.edu>

I have a mailman umbrella list that was changed recently to show the original senders email address for reply directly to the sender.  The problem we have now is that when the sub list receives the posting, the list administrator(s) receive notification for approval if the sender is not a member or on the accepted senders list of the sublist.

The umbrella list is already in the accepted senders list.  Is there a setting that will allow the emails to traverse to the sublists without adding all employee emails to the allowed senders list?  A wildcard entry *.mydomain.com is not an accepted solution to this either.

Thank you for you responses.

Jack

From mail at andy74.com  Thu Feb  3 15:43:10 2011
From: mail at andy74.com (Andreas Hanny)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 15:43:10 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] sender gets his own message!
Message-ID: <AANLkTikGUm9nTkBuenW-cSaVrgYjUWXrYBzmVYfbNxYu@mail.gmail.com>

Hi!

I've just set up mailman 2.1.13, my only list till now is "mailman".
Everything works fine except the thing that the sender of a message gets his
own message, too. On an other server where I run mailman that doesn't occur.
I could not find any option to set.
Anyone an idea?

Thank you!

Andreas

From ron at ronware.org  Thu Feb  3 14:40:33 2011
From: ron at ronware.org (Ron Aaron)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 15:40:33 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mail to list delivers into a local mailbox instead
	of the list
In-Reply-To: <201102031538.29220.ron@ronware.org>
References: <201102031538.29220.ron@ronware.org>
Message-ID: <201102031540.33946.ron@ronware.org>

I've got an "ispconfig3" based Ubuntu 10.10 server installation, running 
postfix.  The mail server works perfectly.


I wish to add mailman to the setup, and am hitting a brick wall.  I've looked 
all over for clues, but no luck so far.


I created a new domain "lists.my.dom", where the "my.dom" is the actual doman.  
In postfix "main.cf"  I added a special "/etc/mailman/transport" which has the 
single line:


     lists.my.dom   mailman:


The default setup of master.cf already has an appropriate mailman line in it.


I also have the "recipient_delimiter", "owner_request_special" and 
"mailman_destination_recipient_limit" set as per the FAQs I've read.  I also 
have "virtual_alias_domains" set to lists.my.dom, because without it postfix 
doesn't seem to recognize mail to that domain.


I've got mm_cfg.py set for POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS , and have tried both 
MTA=None and MTA-Postfix to no avail.


What happens is that incoming mail for say, 'test at lists.my.dom' is accepted, 
and eventually gets sent by postfix t' test at my.dom', which ends up being just 
another virtual user.  Of course, that's not what I need to happen.


Anybody have a clue for me?


Thank you very much,
Ron




-- 
For privacy, my GPG key signature is: AD29415D

From ifetch at du.edu  Thu Feb  3 21:26:44 2011
From: ifetch at du.edu (Ivan Fetch)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 13:26:44 -0700
Subject: [Mailman-Users] upgrading list and other data from 2.1.9 to 2.1.14
Message-ID: <79C2D3933C76AB41B6D135F3480AC5C9636695C9@EXCH.du.edu>

Hello,

Is it possible to copy list and archives data from a 2.1.9 Mailman installation, to a 2.1.14 installation, and run bin/update to update data from 2.1.9 to 2.1.14? I assume bin/update will make any necessary changes to data structures, from 2.1.9 to 2.1.14?

Here is why I am doing this:

I took a Mailman 2.1.9 installation from Solaris (everything Mailman is under a single prefix directory) and copied it to A Linux system. I ran make install from Mailman 2.1.14 source, which did `make upgrade' as part of the installation. After some testing, I would like to copy current list and archive data to the Mailman 2.1.14 (Linux) system, at which time that system will become production.


Thanks,

Ivan.























.

From rbraver at ohww.norman.ok.us  Thu Feb  3 21:33:41 2011
From: rbraver at ohww.norman.ok.us (Robert Braver)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 14:33:41 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] sender gets his own message!
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikGUm9nTkBuenW-cSaVrgYjUWXrYBzmVYfbNxYu@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikGUm9nTkBuenW-cSaVrgYjUWXrYBzmVYfbNxYu@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <18110530166.20110203143341@ohww.norman.ok.us>

Hello Andreas,

On Thursday, February 3, 2011, 8:43:10 AM, you wrote:

AH> I've just set up mailman 2.1.13, my only list till now is "mailman".
AH> Everything works fine except the thing that the sender of a message gets his
AH> own message, too. On an other server where I run mailman that doesn't occur.
AH> I could not find any option to set.
AH> Anyone an idea?

To me, this is the normal and expected behavior.  If for any reason
users do not see their own message, they assume it didn't go through
and resend it, or email me asking what is wrong.

This is a configurable preference each user can set.  The
administrator can set this by pulling up a user in membership
management, and checking the "not metoo" box.

-- 
Best regards,
 Robert Braver
 rbraver at ohww.norman.ok.us


From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb  3 23:19:14 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 14:19:14 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Umbrella list - sublist authentication
	foradministrators
In-Reply-To: <531E1BA38BF1BC4A986D608ED41EA2370E761D243E@TUMAIL.tuca.touro.edu>
Message-ID: <PC195201102031419140235aa29bf39@MSAPIRO>

Jack R. Madderra

>I have a mailman umbrella list that was changed recently to show the original senders email address for reply directly to the sender.  The problem we have now is that when the sub list receives the posting, the list administrator(s) receive notification for approval if the sender is not a member or on the accepted senders list of the sublist.
>
>The umbrella list is already in the accepted senders list.  Is there a setting that will allow the emails to traverse to the sublists without adding all employee emails to the allowed senders list?  A wildcard entry *.mydomain.com is not an accepted solution to this either.


If you are not VERPing deliveries, adding
UMBRELLALISTNAME-bounces at mydomain.com as a member of the sub-lists
with delivery disabled should work.

If you set USE_ENVELOPE_SENDER = Yes in mm_cfg.py, you can instead put
this address in accept_these_nonmembers.

If you are VERPing, the address to use needs to be
UMBRELLALISTNAME-bounces+SUBLISTNAME=mydomain.com at mydomain.com, i.e.
the VERPed sender of the post from the umbrella to the sublist.

See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/boA9>.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb  3 23:33:41 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 14:33:41 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mail to list delivers into a local mailbox
	instead of the list
In-Reply-To: <201102031540.33946.ron@ronware.org>
Message-ID: <PC195201102031433410860759c6945@MSAPIRO>

Ron Aaron wrote:
>
>I created a new domain "lists.my.dom", where the "my.dom" is the actual doman.  
>In postfix "main.cf"  I added a special "/etc/mailman/transport" which has the 
>single line:
>
>
>     lists.my.dom   mailman:
>
>
>The default setup of master.cf already has an appropriate mailman line in it.
>
>
>I also have the "recipient_delimiter", "owner_request_special" and 
>"mailman_destination_recipient_limit" set as per the FAQs I've read.  I also 
>have "virtual_alias_domains" set to lists.my.dom, because without it postfix 
>doesn't seem to recognize mail to that domain.


Which indicates Postfix is not seeing that mail to lists.my.dom is
using the mailman transport.

Have you added hash:/etc/mailman/transport to transport_maps in
main.cf? have you run "postmap /etc/mailman/transport" to update
/etc/mailman/transport.db?


>I've got mm_cfg.py set for POSTFIX_STYLE_VIRTUAL_DOMAINS , and have tried both 
>MTA=None and MTA-Postfix to no avail.


Those have no effect on postfix_to_mailman.py delivery. You should have
MTA = None.

<side rant>
postfix_to_mailman.py is a third party module officially unsupported by
the GNU Mailman project. Maybe if everyone who had problems making
their Debian/Ubuntu installation work with postfix_to_mailman.py went
to Debian for support instead of coming here, Debian wold fix the
package or improve the documentation or whatever is necessary to avoid
these problems.
</side rant>

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mail at andy74.com  Thu Feb  3 23:46:45 2011
From: mail at andy74.com (Andreas Hanny)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 23:46:45 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] sender gets his own message!
In-Reply-To: <E23ADA34-0F5F-48C7-B8CA-2A53C2B9F117@gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikGUm9nTkBuenW-cSaVrgYjUWXrYBzmVYfbNxYu@mail.gmail.com>
	<16D6C137-C509-41B2-9867-F6AB2CD2DA3F@gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimZP92y-59Ym7Bwt0GA1AJpECXKgTnAiz5r4q5m@mail.gmail.com>
	<E23ADA34-0F5F-48C7-B8CA-2A53C2B9F117@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinyDmXyLqbp75A47o=hDKq9VMW=VMLSWU-c7rhV@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you again, Doug!

Greetings from Italy

Andreas


2011/2/3 Doug Gaff <doug.gaff at gmail.com>

> (forgot to copy the list)
>
> 1) I like getting copies of my own messages. It's a "confirmation" that the
> message hit the server and relayed, and it keeps my response in a thread
> when sorting by conversation/thread in my mail client. My biggest complaint
> with gmail addresses is that they filter out mailing list bounce backs on
> purpose.
>
> 2) On the general tab in the admin page, select "Do not send a copy of a
> member's own post" under new_member_options. No metoo will be automatically
> set.
>
> Doug
>
>
> On Feb 3, 2011, at 4:04 PM, Andreas Hanny wrote:
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> seems to be the right field, now it works.
> But there come 2 new questions in my mind:
>
> 1) Why on my other server with mailman 2.1.5 it isn't necessary to set this
> field active to avoid to get own messages?
> 2) Is there a way to set this field active automatically?
>
> Thank you again!
>
> Andreas
>
>
> 2011/2/3 Doug Gaff <doug.gaff at gmail.com>
>
>> I believe "not metoo" in the Membership List is the field you want to
>> toggle to avoid your own bouncebacks.
>>
>> Doug
>>
>>
>> On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Andreas Hanny wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I've just set up mailman 2.1.13, my only list till now is "mailman".
>> Everything works fine except the thing that the sender of a message gets
>> his
>> own message, too. On an other server where I run mailman that doesn't
>> occur.
>> I could not find any option to set.
>> Anyone an idea?
>>
>> Thank you!
>>
>> Andreas
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
>> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
>> Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
>> Searchable Archives:
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
>> Unsubscribe:
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dougggaff%40yahoo.com
>>
>>
>
>

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb  3 23:57:23 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 14:57:23 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] upgrading list and other data from 2.1.9 to
	2.1.14
In-Reply-To: <79C2D3933C76AB41B6D135F3480AC5C9636695C9@EXCH.du.edu>
Message-ID: <PC19520110203145723089122157192@MSAPIRO>

Ivan Fetch wrote:
>
>Is it possible to copy list and archives data from a 2.1.9 Mailman installation, to a 2.1.14 installation, and run bin/update to update data from 2.1.9 to 2.1.14? I assume bin/update will make any necessary changes to data structures, from 2.1.9 to 2.1.14?
>


Yes and no. If you just copy a lists/LISTNAME/config.pck from any 2.1.x
or even (I think) from 2.0.x to a more recent installation, the first
time the list is instantiated, mailman will automatically do any
required updates.

bin/update is designed for migrating an entire installation, not
individual lists, and it normally won't do anything if run by hand in
an existing installation. It does migration tasks other than updating
the actual list config.

For the archives, the recommended process is to first check and if
necessary fix the archives/private/LISTNAME.mbox/LISTNAME.mbox files
with bin/cleanarch and then move those mbox files only and build
archives on the new host with bin/arch --wipe.

It is possible to just move the archives/private/LISTNAME tree rather
than running bin/arch --wipe as long as permissions are OK or fixed
after the move, but you still need to move
archives/private/LISTNAME.mbox/LISTNAME.mbox.

You don't need to do anything with archives/public/LISTNAME as those
symlinks will be created for lists with public archives when the list
is first accessed.

See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/2oA9>.

Also, if your MTA uses aliases, you may need to run bin/genaliases
after the move and/or manually update aliases.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From doug.gaff at gmail.com  Thu Feb  3 21:23:39 2011
From: doug.gaff at gmail.com (Doug Gaff)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 15:23:39 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] sender gets his own message!
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikGUm9nTkBuenW-cSaVrgYjUWXrYBzmVYfbNxYu@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikGUm9nTkBuenW-cSaVrgYjUWXrYBzmVYfbNxYu@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C37454D4-E8E7-41B3-91FC-D83ACFA6DEB3@gmail.com>

I believe "not metoo" in the Membership List is the field you want to toggle to avoid your own bouncebacks.

Doug

On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Andreas Hanny wrote:

Hi!

I've just set up mailman 2.1.13, my only list till now is "mailman".
Everything works fine except the thing that the sender of a message gets his
own message, too. On an other server where I run mailman that doesn't occur.
I could not find any option to set.
Anyone an idea?

Thank you!

Andreas
------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dougggaff%40yahoo.com


From doug.gaff at gmail.com  Thu Feb  3 23:15:33 2011
From: doug.gaff at gmail.com (Doug Gaff)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 17:15:33 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] sender gets his own message!
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimZP92y-59Ym7Bwt0GA1AJpECXKgTnAiz5r4q5m@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikGUm9nTkBuenW-cSaVrgYjUWXrYBzmVYfbNxYu@mail.gmail.com>
	<16D6C137-C509-41B2-9867-F6AB2CD2DA3F@gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimZP92y-59Ym7Bwt0GA1AJpECXKgTnAiz5r4q5m@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E23ADA34-0F5F-48C7-B8CA-2A53C2B9F117@gmail.com>

(forgot to copy the list)

1) I like getting copies of my own messages. It's a "confirmation" that the message hit the server and relayed, and it keeps my response in a thread when sorting by conversation/thread in my mail client. My biggest complaint with gmail addresses is that they filter out mailing list bounce backs on purpose.

2) On the general tab in the admin page, select "Do not send a copy of a member's own post" under new_member_options. No metoo will be automatically set.

Doug


On Feb 3, 2011, at 4:04 PM, Andreas Hanny wrote:

Hi Doug,

seems to be the right field, now it works.
But there come 2 new questions in my mind:

1) Why on my other server with mailman 2.1.5 it isn't necessary to set this field active to avoid to get own messages?
2) Is there a way to set this field active automatically?

Thank you again!

Andreas


2011/2/3 Doug Gaff <doug.gaff at gmail.com>
I believe "not metoo" in the Membership List is the field you want to toggle to avoid your own bouncebacks.

Doug


On Feb 3, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Andreas Hanny wrote:

Hi!

I've just set up mailman 2.1.13, my only list till now is "mailman".
Everything works fine except the thing that the sender of a message gets his
own message, too. On an other server where I run mailman that doesn't occur.
I could not find any option to set.
Anyone an idea?

Thank you!

Andreas
------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users at python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dougggaff%40yahoo.com




From ifetch at du.edu  Fri Feb  4 02:52:23 2011
From: ifetch at du.edu (Ivan Fetch)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 18:52:23 -0700 (MST)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] upgrading list and other data from 2.1.9 to
 2.1.14
In-Reply-To: <PC19520110203145723089122157192@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC19520110203145723089122157192@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102031842040.23898@tnetnzry.hgf.qh.rqh>

Hello, thanks for your reply,


On Thu, 3 Feb 2011, Mark Sapiro wrote:

> Ivan Fetch wrote:
>>
>> Is it possible to copy list and archives data from a 2.1.9 Mailman installation, to a 2.1.14 installation, and run bin/update to update data from 2.1.9 to 2.1.14? I assume bin/update will make any necessary changes to data structures, from 2.1.9 to 2.1.14?
>>
>
>
> Yes and no. If you just copy a lists/LISTNAME/config.pck from any 2.1.x
> or even (I think) from 2.0.x to a more recent installation, the first
> time the list is instantiated, mailman will automatically do any
> required updates.
>
> bin/update is designed for migrating an entire installation, not
> individual lists, and it normally won't do anything if run by hand in
> an existing installation. It does migration tasks other than updating
> the actual list config.
>
> For the archives, the recommended process is to first check and if
> necessary fix the archives/private/LISTNAME.mbox/LISTNAME.mbox files
> with bin/cleanarch and then move those mbox files only and build
> archives on the new host with bin/arch --wipe.
>
> It is possible to just move the archives/private/LISTNAME tree rather
> than running bin/arch --wipe as long as permissions are OK or fixed
> after the move, but you still need to move
> archives/private/LISTNAME.mbox/LISTNAME.mbox.
>
> You don't need to do anything with archives/public/LISTNAME as those
> symlinks will be created for lists with public archives when the list
> is first accessed.
>
> See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/2oA9>.
>
> Also, if your MTA uses aliases, you may need to run bin/genaliases
> after the move and/or manually update aliases.
>

    Thank you - this helps me walk through the process.

    The goal is to move all lists, archives, and data to the new box, and 
then install Mailman 2.1.14 over those directories - I have done this.

    When this box goes production, I want to refresh the lists, archives, 
and data from the current 2.1.9 Mailman. All paths and host names will 
stay the same.

    It sounds like there isn't anything I have to do after syncing the 
lists, data, and archives directories.

    IF a list's pck file is updated when the list is next instantiated - 
what is the simplest thing that will trigger this? Iterating through all 
lists somehow? (I realize this isn't strictly necessary to do because it 
will happen on the fly)

Thanks,

Ivan.


From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb  4 03:15:56 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 18:15:56 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] upgrading list and other data from 2.1.9
	to2.1.14
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102031842040.23898@tnetnzry.hgf.qh.rqh>
Message-ID: <PC195201102031815560844f2cde944@MSAPIRO>

Ivan Fetch wrote:
>
>    When this box goes production, I want to refresh the lists, archives, 
>and data from the current 2.1.9 Mailman. All paths and host names will 
>stay the same.
>
>    It sounds like there isn't anything I have to do after syncing the 
>lists, data, and archives directories.


That is correct, but there may be timing issues. Are you changing DNS
or physically reassigning the IP address to the new box.

If you're changing DNS, I'd start now and give all the relevant DNS
entries a 5 minute or less TTL, so you don't have to worry about old
DNS for more than 5 minutes.

If you're not going to sync qfiles, you need to make sure that all
queues are empty on the old box. Maybe wait for a quiet moment when
queues are empty and stop the MTA.


>    IF a list's pck file is updated when the list is next instantiated - 
>what is the simplest thing that will trigger this? Iterating through all 
>lists somehow? (I realize this isn't strictly necessary to do because it 
>will happen on the fly)


 From the command line, a simple bin/list_lists will do it. From the
web, simply going to the listinfo or admin overview page for any host
will do.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From ifetch at du.edu  Fri Feb  4 04:00:00 2011
From: ifetch at du.edu (Ivan Fetch)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 20:00:00 -0700 (MST)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] upgrading list and other data from 2.1.9
 to2.1.14
In-Reply-To: <PC195201102031815560844f2cde944@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC195201102031815560844f2cde944@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102031947110.23898@tnetnzry.hgf.qh.rqh>

Hello,


On Thu, 3 Feb 2011, Mark Sapiro wrote:

> That is correct, but there may be timing issues. Are you changing DNS
> or physically reassigning the IP address to the new box.
>
> If you're changing DNS, I'd start now and give all the relevant DNS
> entries a 5 minute or less TTL, so you don't have to worry about old
> DNS for more than 5 minutes.

Thanks for thinking about / covering all of these aspects. The IP will 
move to the new box.


> If you're not going to sync qfiles, you need to make sure that all
> queues are empty on the old box. Maybe wait for a quiet moment when
> queues are empty and stop the MTA.

    I was planning to sync qfiles also (now that you mention it). Looking 
at our current qfiles, some of them have files which look like they should 
be deleted:

Bounces: 260 (all .bak, but one .tmp)
Shunt: 145 .pck

    Should I kill the files in bounces, and run unshunt on files in shunt 
which are not terribly old?


Thanks for your time,

Ivan.



From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb  4 04:21:45 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 19:21:45 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] upgrading list and other data from 2.1.9to2.1.14
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102031947110.23898@tnetnzry.hgf.qh.rqh>
Message-ID: <PC1952011020319214508918b2b06e8@MSAPIRO>

Ivan Fetch wrote:
>
>    I was planning to sync qfiles also (now that you mention it). Looking 
>at our current qfiles, some of them have files which look like they should 
>be deleted:
>
>Bounces: 260 (all .bak, but one .tmp)


There was a bug in 2.1.9 that would leave the .bak file behind when the
runner encountered an "unparseable message" exception. You can examine
these files with bin/dumpdb or bin/show_qfiles, but I think they're
all spam and should be removed.


>Shunt: 145 .pck
>
>    Should I kill the files in bounces, and run unshunt on files in shunt 
>which are not terribly old?


Again, look at the shunt queue entries with bin/dumpdb or
bin/show_qfiles and delete all but the "good" ones. Also look in
Mailman's error log for the corresponding time stamped entries to see
what the underlying issue is. If it isn't fixed, the messages will
just be shunted again.

Once you have only "good" entries in the shunt queue, you can run
unshunt.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From ron at ronware.org  Fri Feb  4 07:54:06 2011
From: ron at ronware.org (Ron Aaron)
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 08:54:06 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mail to list delivers into a local mailbox
	instead of the list
In-Reply-To: <PC195201102031433410860759c6945@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC195201102031433410860759c6945@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <201102040854.13606.ron@ronware.org>

You wrote:

> Which indicates Postfix is not seeing that mail to lists.my.dom is
> using the mailman transport.

Right.

> Have you added hash:/etc/mailman/transport to transport_maps in
> main.cf? have you run "postmap /etc/mailman/transport" to update
> /etc/mailman/transport.db?

Yes I have, and I restarted mailman and postfix.

> Those have no effect on postfix_to_mailman.py delivery. You should have
> MTA = None.

OK, done.

> postfix_to_mailman.py is a third party module officially unsupported by
> the GNU Mailman project. Maybe if everyone who had problems making
> their Debian/Ubuntu installation work with postfix_to_mailman.py went
> to Debian for support instead of coming here, Debian wold fix the
> package or improve the documentation or whatever is necessary to avoid
> these problems.

<em>  Sorry; I had no idea of this, I'm just trying to get the system to work 
with mailman.  Obviously it is possible, and if I can get it done I'll be 
happy to contribute documentation.

After re-setting things as you mentioned above, and restarting the daemons, I 
sent an email to my test list.  Here is the relevant mail.log:

postfix/smtpd[16482]: connect from unknown[192.168.18.100]
postfix/smtpd[16482]: setting up TLS connection from unknown[192.168.18.100]
postfix/smtpd[16482]: Anonymous TLS connection established from 
unknown[192.168.18.100]: TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)                                                                                            
postfix/smtpd[16482]: C73305415EF: client=unknown[192.168.18.100], 
sasl_method=PLAIN, sasl_username=ron at my.dom                                                                                                                     
postfix/cleanup[16486]: C73305415EF: message-id=<201102040841.26293.ron at my.dom>
postfix/qmgr[16475]: C73305415EF: from=<ron at my.dom>, size=691, nrcpt=1 (queue 
active)
spamd[5057]: spamd: connection from localhost [127.0.0.1] at port 33232
spamd[5057]: spamd: setuid to vmail succeeded
spamd[5057]: spamd: processing message <201102040841.26293.ron at my.dom> for 
vmail:5000
spamd[5057]: spamd: clean message (-1.0/5.0) for vmail:5000 in 3.3 seconds, 
673 bytes.
spamd[5057]: spamd: result: . -1 - ALL_TRUSTED 
scantime=3.3,size=673,user=vmail,uid=5000,required_score=5.0,rhost=localhost,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=33232,mid=<201102040841.26293.ron at my.dom>,autolearn=ham
postfix/pickup[16474]: 5C9BB541603: uid=5000 from=<ron at my.dom>
postfix/pipe[16487]: C73305415EF: to=<test at lists.my.dom>, relay=spamassassin, 
delay=3.6, delays=0.19/0.01/0/3.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via 
spamassassin service)
postfix/qmgr[16475]: C73305415EF: removed
postfix/cleanup[16486]: 5C9BB541603: message-id=<201102040841.26293.ron at my.dom>
spamd[5056]: prefork: child states: II
postfix/qmgr[16475]: 5C9BB541603: from=<ron at my.dom>, size=981, nrcpt=1 (queue 
active)
postfix/pipe[16492]: 5C9BB541603: to=<test at my.dom>, 
orig_to=<test at lists.my.dom>, relay=maildrop, delay=0.32, 
delays=0.2/0.01/0/0.12, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via maildrop 
service)
postfix/qmgr[16475]: 5C9BB541603: removed
postfix/smtpd[16482]: disconnect from unknown[192.168.18.100]


Note that lists.my.dom seems to get mapped to just my.dom and no mention of 
mailman appears here (I assume I would see some mailman logging going on 
here).  The /var/log/mailman/qrunner log only shows it was restart.

So the question is why would postfix not be passing the connection on to 
mailman?  Is there another 'transport' key I should use, perhaps, or maybe one 
of the 'filter' keys?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20110204/415e82a7/attachment.pgp>

From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb  4 18:26:33 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 09:26:33 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mail to list delivers into a local mailbox
 instead of the list
In-Reply-To: <201102040854.13606.ron@ronware.org>
References: <PC195201102031433410860759c6945@MSAPIRO>
	<201102040854.13606.ron@ronware.org>
Message-ID: <4D4C36C9.4080206@msapiro.net>

On 2/3/2011 10:54 PM, Ron Aaron wrote:
> 
> After re-setting things as you mentioned above, and restarting the daemons, I 
> sent an email to my test list.  Here is the relevant mail.log:
> 
> postfix/smtpd[16482]: connect from unknown[192.168.18.100]
> postfix/smtpd[16482]: setting up TLS connection from unknown[192.168.18.100]
> postfix/smtpd[16482]: Anonymous TLS connection established from 
> unknown[192.168.18.100]: TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)                                                                                            
> postfix/smtpd[16482]: C73305415EF: client=unknown[192.168.18.100], 
> sasl_method=PLAIN, sasl_username=ron at my.dom                                                                                                                     
> postfix/cleanup[16486]: C73305415EF: message-id=<201102040841.26293.ron at my.dom>
> postfix/qmgr[16475]: C73305415EF: from=<ron at my.dom>, size=691, nrcpt=1 (queue 
> active)
> spamd[5057]: spamd: connection from localhost [127.0.0.1] at port 33232
> spamd[5057]: spamd: setuid to vmail succeeded
> spamd[5057]: spamd: processing message <201102040841.26293.ron at my.dom> for 
> vmail:5000
> spamd[5057]: spamd: clean message (-1.0/5.0) for vmail:5000 in 3.3 seconds, 
> 673 bytes.
> spamd[5057]: spamd: result: . -1 - ALL_TRUSTED 
> scantime=3.3,size=673,user=vmail,uid=5000,required_score=5.0,rhost=localhost,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=33232,mid=<201102040841.26293.ron at my.dom>,autolearn=ham
> postfix/pickup[16474]: 5C9BB541603: uid=5000 from=<ron at my.dom>
> postfix/pipe[16487]: C73305415EF: to=<test at lists.my.dom>, relay=spamassassin, 
> delay=3.6, delays=0.19/0.01/0/3.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via 
> spamassassin service)
> postfix/qmgr[16475]: C73305415EF: removed
> postfix/cleanup[16486]: 5C9BB541603: message-id=<201102040841.26293.ron at my.dom>
> spamd[5056]: prefork: child states: II
> postfix/qmgr[16475]: 5C9BB541603: from=<ron at my.dom>, size=981, nrcpt=1 (queue 
> active)
> postfix/pipe[16492]: 5C9BB541603: to=<test at my.dom>, 
> orig_to=<test at lists.my.dom>, relay=maildrop, delay=0.32, 
> delays=0.2/0.01/0/0.12, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via maildrop 
> service)
> postfix/qmgr[16475]: 5C9BB541603: removed
> postfix/smtpd[16482]: disconnect from unknown[192.168.18.100]
> 
> 
> Note that lists.my.dom seems to get mapped to just my.dom and no mention of 
> mailman appears here (I assume I would see some mailman logging going on 
> here).  The /var/log/mailman/qrunner log only shows it was restart.
> 
> So the question is why would postfix not be passing the connection on to 
> mailman?  Is there another 'transport' key I should use, perhaps, or maybe one 
> of the 'filter' keys?


It may have something to do with passing through spamassassin, but I
don't think so because queue id 5C9BB541603 is the message after
spamassassin and it notes orig_to=<test at lists.my.dom>. However, I'm not
sure why the message is handled by Postfix's pipe module. That seems odd.

If you post the output of postconf -n, we may be able to help further.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From Parker at siam.org  Sat Feb  5 00:32:19 2011
From: Parker at siam.org (Jim Parker)
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 18:32:19 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Cannot exec /etc/mail/smrsh: Permission denied
In-Reply-To: <4D43217D.3080909@yahoo.com>
References: <4D43217D.3080909@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <04FCAACB98219E418827A2D6AA25938E04809053@sus302.siam.org>

The key here may be the empty directory listing for /etc/smrsh:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mailman-users-bounces+parker=siam.org at python.org
> [mailto:mailman-users-bounces+parker=siam.org at python.org] On Behalf
> Of John Espiro
> Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 3:05 PM
> To: mailman-users at python.org
> Subject: [Mailman-Users] Cannot exec /etc/mail/smrsh: Permission
> denied
> 
> When I send a message to the mailing list I get:
> 
>  sm-mta[16327]: p0SJuInx016321: SYSERR(root): Cannot exec
> /etc/mail/smrsh: Permission denied
> Jan 28 19:56:22 sm-mta[16326]: p0SJuInx016321:
> to="|/usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman post LISTNAME", ctladdr=<ADDRESS>
> (8/0), delay=00:00:01, xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=prog, pri=31689,
> dsn=4.0.0, stat=Operating system error
> 
> System: Ubuntu 10.10 Server 64bit
> 
> I've read through this:
> 
> http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-install/node32.html
> 
> grep smrsh /etc/mail/sendmail.cf
> #####  $Id: smrsh.m4,v 8.14 1999/11/18 05:06:23 ca Exp $  #####
> Mprog,  P=/etc/mail/smrsh, F=lsDFM
> 
> smrsh is in: :/usr/lib/sm.bin
> 
> In /usr/lib/sm.bin, I ran: ln -s /usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman
> mailman
> In /etc/mail/smrsh, I ran: ln -s /usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman
> mailman
> 
> 
> Still, the problem persists.  I am sure this must be a permissions
> issue, then again, maybe not.
> 
> Other data:
> uid=51(smmsp) gid=51(smmsp) groups=51(smmsp),45(sasl)
> uid=103(smmta) gid=106(smmta) groups=106(smmta),45(sasl)
> uid=8(mail) gid=8(mail) groups=8(mail)
> 
> ls -la /etc/mail/smrsh
> drwsr-sr-x 2 root  root  4096 2011-01-28 19:31 .
> 
In the directory /etc/smrsh is actually empty, it means your command

ln -s /usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman mailman

didn't work. It may have failed silently. Try running it either as root
or using sudo:

while in /etc/smrsh:

sudo ln -s /usr/lib/mailman/mail/mailman mailman

That might fix it.

JimP

--
+ --- --- --- --- ---  --- --- --- +
| Jim Parker      parker at siam.org  |
|   Systems Engineer               |
| Society for Industrial &         |
| Applied Mathematics              |
| Philadelphia  (267)350-6327      |
+ --- --- --- --- --- ---  --- --- + 
 



From ron at ronware.org  Sat Feb  5 17:51:54 2011
From: ron at ronware.org (Ron Aaron)
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 18:51:54 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mail to list delivers into a local mailbox
	instead of the list
In-Reply-To: <4D4C36C9.4080206@msapiro.net>
References: <PC195201102031433410860759c6945@MSAPIRO>
	<201102040854.13606.ron@ronware.org> <4D4C36C9.4080206@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <201102051852.01445.ron@ronware.org>


> It may have something to do with passing through spamassassin, but I
> don't think so because queue id 5C9BB541603 is the message after
> spamassassin and it notes orig_to=<test at lists.my.dom>. However, I'm not
> sure why the message is handled by Postfix's pipe module. That seems odd.

Right.  I've also noticed that I cannot seem to get clamsmtpd hooked in; at 
least, it never tries to use it.  But that's a different problem...

> If you post the output of postconf -n, we may be able to help further.

Here goes.  I'm not sure if I mentioned that this is an "ispconfig3" based 
setup, don't know if that makes a difference (but it may).  Output of postconf 
-n follows:

alias_maps = hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/aliases
allow_mail_to_files = alias,forward,include
body_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/body_checks
broken_sasl_auth_clients = yes
config_directory = /etc/postfix
content_filter = scan:127.0.0.1:10025
header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/header_checks
inet_interfaces = all
mailbox_size_limit = 0
message_size_limit = 0
mime_header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/mime_header_checks
mydestination = 
myhostname = my.dom
nested_header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/nested_header_checks
owner_request_special = no
proxy_read_maps = $local_recipient_maps $mydestination $virtual_alias_maps 
$virtual_alias_domains $virtual_mailbox_maps $virtual_mailbox_domains 
$relay_recipient_maps $relay_domains $canonical_maps $sender_canonical_maps 
$recipient_canonical_maps $relocated_maps $transport_maps $mynetworks 
$virtual_mailbox_limit_maps
receive_override_options = no_address_mappings
recipient_delimiter = +
relay_recipient_maps = mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_relayrecipientmaps.cf, 
hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/virtual-mailman
relayhost = [myisp.smtp.host]
smtp_sasl_password_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd
smtp_tls_note_starttls_offer = yes
smtp_use_tls = yes
smtpd_client_restrictions = check_client_access mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-
virtual_client.cf
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = 
permit_sasl_authenticated,permit_mynetworks,reject_unauth_destination
smtpd_sasl_auth_enable = yes
smtpd_sasl_authenticated_header = yes
smtpd_sasl_security_options = noanonymous
smtpd_sender_restrictions = check_sender_access mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-
virtual_sender.cf
smtpd_tls_CAfile = /etc/postfix/ssl/cacert.pem
smtpd_tls_auth_only = no
smtpd_tls_cert_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/smtpd.crt
smtpd_tls_key_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/smtpd.key
smtpd_tls_loglevel = 1
smtpd_tls_received_header = yes
smtpd_tls_security_level = may
smtpd_tls_session_cache_timeout = 3600s
smtpd_use_tls = yes
tls_random_source = dev:/dev/urandom
transport_maps = hash:/etc/mailman/transport, proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-
virtual_transports.cf
virtual_alias_domains = lists.my.dom
virtual_alias_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-
virtual_relayrecipientmaps.cf ,mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_forwardings.cf 
,mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-
virtual_email2email.cf,hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/virtual-
mailman,hash:/etc/aliases
virtual_gid_maps = static:5000
virtual_mailbox_base = /var/vmail
virtual_mailbox_domains = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_domains.cf
virtual_mailbox_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_mailboxes.cf
virtual_transport = maildrop
virtual_uid_maps = static:5000
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20110205/20e59d2b/attachment.pgp>

From mark at msapiro.net  Sat Feb  5 19:06:28 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 10:06:28 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mail to list delivers into a local mailbox
 instead of the list
In-Reply-To: <201102051852.01445.ron@ronware.org>
References: <PC195201102031433410860759c6945@MSAPIRO>
	<201102040854.13606.ron@ronware.org> <4D4C36C9.4080206@msapiro.net>
	<201102051852.01445.ron@ronware.org>
Message-ID: <4D4D91A4.2070804@msapiro.net>

On 2/5/2011 8:51 AM, Ron Aaron wrote:
> 
> Here goes.  I'm not sure if I mentioned that this is an "ispconfig3" based 
> setup, don't know if that makes a difference (but it may).  Output of postconf 
> -n follows:
> 
> alias_maps = hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/aliases

Remove the above. It is for delivery via aliases, not postfix_to_mailman.py


> allow_mail_to_files = alias,forward,include
> body_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/body_checks
> broken_sasl_auth_clients = yes
> config_directory = /etc/postfix
> content_filter = scan:127.0.0.1:10025
> header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/header_checks
> inet_interfaces = all
> mailbox_size_limit = 0
> message_size_limit = 0
> mime_header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/mime_header_checks
> mydestination = 
> myhostname = my.dom
> nested_header_checks = regexp:/etc/postfix/nested_header_checks
> owner_request_special = no
> proxy_read_maps = $local_recipient_maps $mydestination $virtual_alias_maps 
> $virtual_alias_domains $virtual_mailbox_maps $virtual_mailbox_domains 
> $relay_recipient_maps $relay_domains $canonical_maps $sender_canonical_maps 
> $recipient_canonical_maps $relocated_maps $transport_maps $mynetworks 
> $virtual_mailbox_limit_maps
> receive_override_options = no_address_mappings
> recipient_delimiter = +
> relay_recipient_maps = mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_relayrecipientmaps.cf, 
> hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/virtual-mailman

Remove hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/virtual-mailman. lists.my.dom is not a
relay domain so the list addresses aren't relay_recipients, and
virtual-mailman isn't going to be maintained anyway with MTA = None.


> relayhost = [myisp.smtp.host]
> smtp_sasl_password_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd
> smtp_tls_note_starttls_offer = yes
> smtp_use_tls = yes
> smtpd_client_restrictions = check_client_access mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-
> virtual_client.cf
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = 
> permit_sasl_authenticated,permit_mynetworks,reject_unauth_destination
> smtpd_sasl_auth_enable = yes
> smtpd_sasl_authenticated_header = yes
> smtpd_sasl_security_options = noanonymous
> smtpd_sender_restrictions = check_sender_access mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-
> virtual_sender.cf
> smtpd_tls_CAfile = /etc/postfix/ssl/cacert.pem
> smtpd_tls_auth_only = no
> smtpd_tls_cert_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/smtpd.crt
> smtpd_tls_key_file = /etc/postfix/ssl/smtpd.key
> smtpd_tls_loglevel = 1
> smtpd_tls_received_header = yes
> smtpd_tls_security_level = may
> smtpd_tls_session_cache_timeout = 3600s
> smtpd_use_tls = yes
> tls_random_source = dev:/dev/urandom
> transport_maps = hash:/etc/mailman/transport, proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-
> virtual_transports.cf
> virtual_alias_domains = lists.my.dom

Remove the above. It is wrong and may be the source of your problem.
This and mailman/data/aliases and virtual-mailman are for 'standard'
Mailman/Postfix integration, not for postfix_to_mailman.py


> virtual_alias_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-
> virtual_relayrecipientmaps.cf ,mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_forwardings.cf 
> ,mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-
> virtual_email2email.cf,hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/virtual-
> mailman,hash:/etc/aliases

Remove hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/virtual-mailman from
virtual_alias_maps. Also, it seems unusual for hash:/etc/aliases to be
in virtual_alias_maps and not in alias_maps. Normally, /etc/aliases is
aliases, not a virtual mapping.


> virtual_gid_maps = static:5000
> virtual_mailbox_base = /var/vmail
> virtual_mailbox_domains = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_domains.cf
> virtual_mailbox_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql-virtual_mailboxes.cf
> virtual_transport = maildrop
> virtual_uid_maps = static:5000


-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From ron at ronware.org  Sat Feb  5 19:46:16 2011
From: ron at ronware.org (Ron Aaron)
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 20:46:16 +0200
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mail to list delivers into a local mailbox
	instead of the list
In-Reply-To: <4D4D91A4.2070804@msapiro.net>
References: <PC195201102031433410860759c6945@MSAPIRO>
	<201102051852.01445.ron@ronware.org> <4D4D91A4.2070804@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <201102052046.16763.ron@ronware.org>

After following all your directions, I have a working mailman system, THANK 
YOU!!

Best regards,
Ron
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20110205/846af8d3/attachment.pgp>

From arthurd23 at bell.net  Sun Feb  6 15:02:06 2011
From: arthurd23 at bell.net (David Arthur)
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 09:02:06 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] why "bounces"??????
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP464287219245C86C977CE6C1E80@phx.gbl>

I have a mailing list and am the owner and moderator.
People posting messages must be subscribers and the messages are sent to me as moderator to be approved.
Subscribers posting messages receive a message back saying their message is being held waiting for approval by the moderator.
I receive a message advising me there is a message awaiting approval.
However, the message the poster receives has the following in the From: box

From: <eeonlist-bounces at lists.eeon.org>

Why is the word "bounces" there?
The poster is a subscriber and neither my nor the mailing list box is full.
It has confused a number of subscribers who think their message did not go through when it had.
What can I do to correct this and avoid the confusion?

Dave

From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Feb  7 08:50:12 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 23:50:12 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] why "bounces"??????
In-Reply-To: <BLU0-SMTP464287219245C86C977CE6C1E80@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <PC195201102062350120906d4263116@MSAPIRO>

David Arthur wrote:

>Subscribers posting messages receive a message back saying their message is being held waiting for approval by the moderator.
>I receive a message advising me there is a message awaiting approval.
>However, the message the poster receives has the following in the From: box
>
>From: <eeonlist-bounces at lists.eeon.org>
>
>Why is the word "bounces" there?


In general, we can't really send it From: <eeonlist at lists.eeon.org>
because the recipient might reply to it resulting in another message
to the list.

It is sent from the -bounces address mainly for historical reasons. It
would be better to send it from the -owner address.

I have created a bug report at
<https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/714424> for this issue and
will fix it.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From Hotleine.Roland at web.de  Mon Feb  7 09:23:11 2011
From: Hotleine.Roland at web.de (Hotleine.Roland at web.de)
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 09:23:11 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman don't start
Message-ID: <413513783.10743247.1297066991879.JavaMail.fmail@mwmweb016>

Hey Guys,
since yesterday, I got following Problem with Mailman:
After a tried restart, der process simply is not starting (I was able to do so, some days ago).
In the qrunner-log are some messages:
1. "Master qrunner detected subprocess quit" (this messages appears for several subprocesses)" (for alle subprocesses)
2. and later: "Qrunner xy reached maximum restart limit of 10, not restarting"

Also, in the error-log is a message from a tried stop/restart:
"No child process with PID xxxxx available
[Erno 3] Nuch such process"


can somebody help me? I haven't any idea left, why mailman don't like to start

PS: check_perms & check_db reporting everthing to be fine...
___________________________________________________________
NEU: FreePhone - kostenlos mobil telefonieren und surfen!				
Jetzt informieren: http://produkte.web.de/go/webdefreephone

From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Feb  7 18:32:00 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 09:32:00 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman don't start
In-Reply-To: <413513783.10743247.1297066991879.JavaMail.fmail@mwmweb016>
Message-ID: <PC19520110207093200015687157f5c@MSAPIRO>

Hotleine.Roland at web.de wrote:

>Hey Guys,
>since yesterday, I got following Problem with Mailman:
>After a tried restart, der process simply is not starting (I was able to do so, some days ago).
>In the qrunner-log are some messages:
>1. "Master qrunner detected subprocess quit" (this messages appears for several subprocesses)" (for alle subprocesses)
>2. and later: "Qrunner xy reached maximum restart limit of 10, not restarting"


Stop Mailman completely. See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/_4A9>
for info on how to do this. When Mailman is completely stopped, remove
any residual lock files from Mailman's locks/ directory.

Then start Mailman.

Once a qrunner has reached it's restart limit, mailmanctl restart won't
start it again. You have to stop Mailman and then start it.

Also, why are qrunners dying? The log should have messages like

Master qrunner detected subprocess exit (pid: 30050, sig: xxx, sts:
xxx, class: xxxRunner, slice: 1/1)

which indicate the exit status which may be a clue. Also, if the
qrunner died from an uncaught exception, there should be a traceback
in Mailman's error log.


>Also, in the error-log is a message from a tried stop/restart:
>"No child process with PID xxxxx available
>[Erno 3] Nuch such process"


This indicates the running mailmanctl died unexpectedly. Did you have a
power outage or otherwise terminate these processes abnormally?

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From gedeon007 at gmail.com  Mon Feb  7 14:04:15 2011
From: gedeon007 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Chris_Guly=C3=A1s?=)
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 14:04:15 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] migrating users
Message-ID: <AANLkTikvpi7Ce2QPgBbUziGT-WNxvqVq09eF4btN4g+y@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

I'd like to ask your help. Yesterday evening I migrated mailman lists from a
server to another. I did the following:
- maillists listed
- members listed
- owners listed
- admins listed
- maillists' configuration exported
in the old server, then
- maillists created
- maillists' configuration imported
- sync_members ran

I realized that the members' settings were did not copied (for example
digest mode option, password, password reminder feature and so on...). Is it
possible to move these properties somehow? Where are they stored?

Is that possible to migrate the archives? Should I only copy some files from
somewhere to somewhere?

I really need your help, because I googled much but could not find a
solution.

Best regards,


Chris
from Hungary

From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Feb  8 02:24:27 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 17:24:27 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] migrating users
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikvpi7Ce2QPgBbUziGT-WNxvqVq09eF4btN4g+y@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <PC1952011020717242709064be1ede5@MSAPIRO>

Chris Guly?s wrote:
>
>I realized that the members' settings were did not copied (for example
>digest mode option, password, password reminder feature and so on...). Is it
>possible to move these properties somehow? Where are they stored?
>
>Is that possible to migrate the archives? Should I only copy some files from
>somewhere to somewhere?


See the posts linked from the top of the FAQ at
<http://wiki.list.org/x/2oA9>.

Also, the list renaming FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/mYA9> will help
you identify the files to copy.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mcmcfall at gmail.com  Tue Feb  8 14:35:09 2011
From: mcmcfall at gmail.com (Mike McFall)
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 08:35:09 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Missing emails
Message-ID: <AANLkTimCuo-VjXjcH8JiVBPQkNPa2BJfT0w3g=ea0-Yf@mail.gmail.com>

I have people on my list that seem to get some emails that are sent
out, but not others.  Anyone know why this might be?


Thanks,

Mike

From mailman-admin at uni-konstanz.de  Tue Feb  8 16:36:15 2011
From: mailman-admin at uni-konstanz.de (Mailman Admin)
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 16:36:15 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Missing emails
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimCuo-VjXjcH8JiVBPQkNPa2BJfT0w3g=ea0-Yf@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTimCuo-VjXjcH8JiVBPQkNPa2BJfT0w3g=ea0-Yf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D5162EF.6000809@uni-konstanz.de>

Hello Mike

On 02/08/2011 02:35 PM, Mike McFall wrote:
> I have people on my list that seem to get some emails that are sent
> out, but not others.  Anyone know why this might be?

Yes, of course we do.

Sorry, couldn't resist.  ;-)

There are multiple possibilities.
A) There are limits defined by each email provider (e.g. max size, max
number of recipients). So if you send an email to multiple providers
some will get through and others won't, depending on these limits.
B) Spam filtering is done by each provider on it's own. The same email
will be passed on by some and dropped by others.
C) Perhaps you have a misconfigured smtp server which delivers emails
only to some domains.
D) Perhaps there was an temporary network failure. This will lead to
delayed delivery of emails.

In order to check these, you should look into your smtp server log.


Kind regards,
Christian Mack

From Dwayne.Miller at nc4.us  Thu Feb 10 15:43:17 2011
From: Dwayne.Miller at nc4.us (Dwayne.Miller at nc4.us)
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 09:43:17 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Migration of Mailman from Slackware to RHEL
Message-ID: <OF790F014E.EE2D26B9-ON88257833.005002C9-85257833.0050DE41@nc4.us>

I'm forced to migrate an instance of Mailman (v2.1.8) from a Slackware 
distro (Mailman was locally compiled) to a RHEL6 with Mailman (v2.1.12) 
installed via RPM.  The directory structures for Mailman on these two 
servers are completely different.  The Slackware system seems to have all 
of Mailman in the /usr/local/Mailman directory.  The RHEL system seems to 
have put Mailman in several folders.

My goal is to take the Slackware system off-line, move all of the Mailman 
data to the RHEL system, make sure the Mailman configuration is good, then 
bring the RHEL system on-line.  I'm very new to Mailman.

Thanks,
Dwayne







Disclaimer: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or 
entity to
which it is addressed and may contain information which is privileged, 
confidential, proprietary,
or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the 
intended recipient or the person
responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are 
strictly prohibited from
disclosing, distributing, copying, or in any way using this message. If 
you have received this 
communication in error, please notify the sender and destroy and delete 
any copies you may have
received.



From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 10 22:33:39 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 13:33:39 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Migration of Mailman from Slackware to RHEL
In-Reply-To: <OF790F014E.EE2D26B9-ON88257833.005002C9-85257833.0050DE41@nc4.us>
Message-ID: <PC19520110210133339038822f2e76b@MSAPIRO>

Dwayne.Miller at nc4.us wrote:

>I'm forced to migrate an instance of Mailman (v2.1.8) from a Slackware 
>distro (Mailman was locally compiled) to a RHEL6 with Mailman (v2.1.12) 
>installed via RPM.  The directory structures for Mailman on these two 
>servers are completely different.  The Slackware system seems to have all 
>of Mailman in the /usr/local/Mailman directory.  The RHEL system seems to 
>have put Mailman in several folders.


See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/KYCB> for the RHEL file mapping.


>My goal is to take the Slackware system off-line, move all of the Mailman 
>data to the RHEL system, make sure the Mailman configuration is good, then 
>bring the RHEL system on-line.  I'm very new to Mailman.


See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/2oA9> for what to move.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Feb 13 22:58:33 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2011 13:58:33 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman Security Patch Announcement
Message-ID: <4D585409.3080305@msapiro.net>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

An XXS vulnerability affecting Mailman 2.1.14 and prior versions has
recently been discovered. A patch has been developed to address this
issue. The patch is small, affects only one module and can be applied to
a live installation without requiring a restart.

In order to accommodate those who need some notice before applying such
a patch, the patch will be posted on Friday, 18 February at about 16:00
GMT to the same four lists to which this announcement is addressed.

- -- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFNWFQIVVuXXpU7hpMRAixMAJ9CvXBKvSkkF6JAj9qfnPVOQBOz9QCg/ASx
RKTuYnogMT0S96GqSclcXyY=
=l9sU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From bozra at simbanet.co.tz  Tue Feb 15 10:22:22 2011
From: bozra at simbanet.co.tz (Bozra)
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 12:22:22 +0300
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman intergaration with zimbra
Message-ID: <015501cbccf1$da3c9860$8eb5c920$@co.tz>

Dear All,

Thanks for your reply it helped me a lot.

Sorry to bother you Iam  getting  when I ''bin/newlist
-emailhost=virtual-domain1.com -urlhost=<your zimbra host> <listname>
<admin-email-address> <admin-password>'' I get -bash: syntax error near
unexpected token `<'

Is there anything wrong in my syntax?

Regards,

Bozra.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Sapiro [mailto:mark at msapiro.net] 
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 9:24 PM
To: Bozra
Subject: Re: mailman intergaration with zimbra

On 11:59 AM, Bozra wrote:
> 
> But when browsing  http://mail.mydomain.com:7780/mailman/listinfo i 
> get the below error
> 
>  
> 
> *''Bug in Mailman version 2.1.14*
> 
> *   We're sorry, we hit a bug!*
> 
>    Please inform the webmaster for this site of this problem. Printing 
> of traceback and other system information has been explicitly inhibited,
> but the webmaster can find this information in the        Mailman error
> logs."
> 
>  
> 
> At  /usr/local/mailman/logs/error  below is the error I get


The traceback shows

File "/usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Utils.py", line 261, in ScriptURL
  web_page_url = mm cfg.DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN % get_domain()
TypeError: not all arguments converted during string Formatting

This indicates that you have overridden the definition of
DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN in mm_cfg.py and your definition does not contain
exactly one "%s" as in the default

DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'http://%s/mailman/'

If you want to add a port, the correct override is, e.g.,

DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'http://%s:7780/mailman/'

To follow up or if you have other questions, please join the
mailman-users at python.org list at
<http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users>
and post your request there.  Note that this is a publicly archived list.
Do not post personal information that you don't want to expose to the world.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan




From geoff at QuiteLikely.com  Tue Feb 15 21:39:36 2011
From: geoff at QuiteLikely.com (Geoff Shang)
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:39:36 +0200 (IST)
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman intergaration with zimbra
In-Reply-To: <015501cbccf1$da3c9860$8eb5c920$@co.tz>
References: <015501cbccf1$da3c9860$8eb5c920$@co.tz>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1102152236490.3679@data.home>

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Bozra wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Thanks for your reply it helped me a lot.
>
> Sorry to bother you Iam  getting  when I ''bin/newlist
> -emailhost=virtual-domain1.com -urlhost=<your zimbra host> <listname>
> <admin-email-address> <admin-password>'' I get -bash: syntax error near
> unexpected token `<'
>
> Is there anything wrong in my syntax?

uh... You do know that < and > signs are used to describe example text, 
yes?  You should replace it with the actual value expected.  for example, 
<admin-email-address> (given above) should be replaced with the actual 
admin address you intend to own the list.

There should not be any < or > signs in a newlist command.

Geoff.


From noc at simbanet.net  Thu Feb 17 08:30:11 2011
From: noc at simbanet.net (NOC SimbaNET)
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 10:30:11 +0300
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman intergaration with zimbra
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1102152236490.3679@data.home>
References: <015501cbccf1$da3c9860$8eb5c920$@co.tz>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1102152236490.3679@data.home>
Message-ID: <04f301cbce74$833de170$89b9a450$@net>

Dear Geoff,

Thanks 

-----Original Message-----
From: Geoff Shang [mailto:geoff at QuiteLikely.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 11:40 PM
To: mailman-users at python.org
Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] Mailman intergaration with zimbra

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Bozra wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Thanks for your reply it helped me a lot.
>
> Sorry to bother you Iam  getting  when I ''bin/newlist
> -emailhost=virtual-domain1.com -urlhost=<your zimbra host> <listname>
> <admin-email-address> <admin-password>'' I get -bash: syntax error near
> unexpected token `<'
>
> Is there anything wrong in my syntax?

uh... You do know that < and > signs are used to describe example text, 
yes?  You should replace it with the actual value expected.  for example, 
<admin-email-address> (given above) should be replaced with the actual 
admin address you intend to own the list.

There should not be any < or > signs in a newlist command.

Geoff.





From bsfinkel at anl.gov  Thu Feb 17 22:03:42 2011
From: bsfinkel at anl.gov (Barry Finkel)
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:03:42 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Permissions on Mailman Archive Directory
Message-ID: <4D5D8D2E.5060805@anl.gov>

I have a question about permissions for the archive directory.
I am migrating my Mailman server from an Ubuntu Dapper server
on which I installed my own package, built from the SourceForge
source, to an Ubuntu Lucid server, where I am installing the
Ubuntu/Debian package.  The directory in question is

      /var/lib/mailman/archives/private

On my production Dapper server, I have

      drwxrws--x 904 www-data list 24576 2011-02-09 14:17 .

On my test Lucid server I have

      drwxrws--- 10 root list 4096 2011-02-17 11:19 .

There are two differences:

      owner: www-data vs. root
      group execute privileges

In the current configuration I cannot get from the web to the list
archives.  I tried changing the ownership to www-data, and that worked.
I then reset the owner back to root and added group execute
privileges, and that also worked.

What is suggested as the preferred fix?  Thanks.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barry S. Finkel
Computing and Information Systems Division
Argonne National Laboratory          Phone:    +1 (630) 252-7277
9700 South Cass Avenue               Facsimile:+1 (630) 252-4601
Building 240, Room 5.B.8             Internet: BSFinkel at anl.gov
Argonne, IL   60439-4828             IBMMAIL:  I1004994

From mark at msapiro.net  Thu Feb 17 23:01:08 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 14:01:08 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Permissions on Mailman Archive Directory
In-Reply-To: <4D5D8D2E.5060805@anl.gov>
Message-ID: <PC1952011021714010802393b8ee6b7@MSAPIRO>

Barry Finkel wrote:

>I have a question about permissions for the archive directory.
>I am migrating my Mailman server from an Ubuntu Dapper server
>on which I installed my own package, built from the SourceForge
>source, to an Ubuntu Lucid server, where I am installing the
>Ubuntu/Debian package.  The directory in question is
>
>      /var/lib/mailman/archives/private
>
>On my production Dapper server, I have
>
>      drwxrws--x 904 www-data list 24576 2011-02-09 14:17 .


You need either owner=www-data (the web server user) or o+x. You don't
need both, but the only issue is if this server has local users, the
local users can access private archive files with o+x.


>On my test Lucid server I have
>
>      drwxrws--- 10 root list 4096 2011-02-17 11:19 .
>
>There are two differences:
>
>      owner: www-data vs. root
>      group execute privileges
>
>In the current configuration I cannot get from the web to the list
>archives.  I tried changing the ownership to www-data, and that worked.
>I then reset the owner back to root and added group execute
>privileges, and that also worked.
>
>What is suggested as the preferred fix?  Thanks.


The web server needs to be able to search the directory. As noted
above, either owner = www-data or o+x allows this. Owner=www-data is
more restrictive than o+x as it does not allow local users (other than
www-data and the 'list' group) to access archive files directly.

If you don't have non-admin local users on the server, then it doesn't
matter which you do. Read the warning box at
<http://www.list.org/mailman-install/node9.html>.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From joe_madden at hotmail.co.uk  Fri Feb 18 14:33:58 2011
From: joe_madden at hotmail.co.uk (Joe Madden)
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:33:58 +0000
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman not reciving mail
Message-ID: <SNT133-w239649462945D45B2C4C7EAAD40@phx.gbl>


Hi all,
 
 
 
I recently bough a new URL and wanted to port over the mailman from the old url to the new url.
 
I did this by using the "withlist" script, edited the url, moved the mailman lists accross and checked the url - Working.
 
I then sent an email to the mailman system to post on the list and nothing, mailman didnt pick it up.
 
I then reverted the changes using the same method however i came up agienst the same issue (It was working before the url change)
 
I also made the relevent changes to mm_cfg.py.
 
If anyone has any suggestions that would be excellent.
 
thanks
 
Joe. 		 	   		  

From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 18 17:01:57 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 08:01:57 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman Security Patch Announcement
In-Reply-To: <4D585409.3080305@msapiro.net>
References: <4D585409.3080305@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <4D5E97F5.5060203@msapiro.net>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2/13/2011 1:58 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> An XXS vulnerability affecting Mailman 2.1.14 and prior versions has
> recently been discovered. A patch has been developed to address this
> issue. The patch is small, affects only one module and can be applied to
> a live installation without requiring a restart.
> 
> In order to accommodate those who need some notice before applying such
> a patch, the patch will be posted on Friday, 18 February at about 16:00
> GMT to the same four lists to which this announcement is addressed.


The vulnerability has been assigned CVE-2011-0707.

The patch is attached as confirm_xss.patch.txt.

- -- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFNXpf1VVuXXpU7hpMRAs1nAJ97r3VEu5b5jl4JhdNv3r6x+ElqjQCghU+w
Gp0hqWatECAYyAIL7IH9dGk=
=8U6M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: confirm_xss.patch.txt
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20110218/15500b22/attachment.txt>

From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 18 17:35:21 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 08:35:21 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman Security Patch Announcement
In-Reply-To: <4D5E97F5.5060203@msapiro.net>
References: <4D585409.3080305@msapiro.net> <4D5E97F5.5060203@msapiro.net>
Message-ID: <4D5E9FC9.6090607@msapiro.net>

On 2/18/2011 8:01 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> 
> The patch is attached as confirm_xss.patch.txt.
> 

This list's content filtering stripped the patch's signature part. For
those who would want to verify the signature, I am resending the patch
here as a PGP MIME format message which should pass content filtering.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan

-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: confirm_xss.patch.txt
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20110218/ed67289f/attachment.txt>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20110218/ed67289f/attachment.pgp>

From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 18 18:59:39 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 09:59:39 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman not reciving mail
In-Reply-To: <SNT133-w239649462945D45B2C4C7EAAD40@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <PC1952011021809593908906bd355e1@MSAPIRO>

Joe Madden wrote:
> 
>I recently bough a new URL and wanted to port over the mailman from the old url to the new url.
> 
>I did this by using the "withlist" script, edited the url, moved the mailman lists accross and checked the url - Working.
> 
>I then sent an email to the mailman system to post on the list and nothing, mailman didnt pick it up.


What happened to the message? Did it bounce? If so, for what reason? If
not, what's in the MTA's logs?

Did you configure the MTA to deliver to Mailman? See
<http://www.list.org/mailman-install/mail-server.html>.

Also, see the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/A4E9>.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From olivier.michel at u-pec.fr  Sat Feb 19 12:56:20 2011
From: olivier.michel at u-pec.fr (Olivier Michel)
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 12:56:20 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Keep receiving from MYLIST-bounces a notification
	that is wrong
Message-ID: <20110219115620.GB26496@lacl.fr>

Hi,

I keep receiving from a list called MYLIST a moderator request for a
waiting message that should be considered (all traffic is moderated on
that list) while actually there is no such message to be moderated. I
looked through the FAQ of Mailman, through the pending queues and the
postfix sending queue and everything is empty.

Do you have any clue where I could look for that message to be
removed?

Configuration: mailman  1:2.1.11-11+lenny1 + postfix 2.5.5-1.1

All the best,
Olivier.

From dnewman at networktest.com  Fri Feb 18 17:10:31 2011
From: dnewman at networktest.com (David Newman)
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 08:10:31 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] https and virtual domains
Message-ID: <4D5E99F7.4060607@networktest.com>

How to configure Mailman to handle https redirects to public archives
for virtual domains?

This is for a server with a canonical name of mail.domain1.tld, and
virtual names of lists.domain2.tld, lists.domain3.tld, etc.

With the mm.cfg config pasted below, clicking the archives link on a
list page for lists.domain2.tld redirects to

https://mail.domain1.tld/pipermail/listname

which fails because the list name is associated with domain2.tld and not
domain1.tld.

Not sure if this is related, but this is after running 'withlist -l -r
fix_url listname' on domain2.tld's mailing list and restarting mailman.

Thanks in advance for configuration clues.

dn


# Put YOUR site-specific settings below this line.
MTA = 'Postfix'
MAILMAN_SITE_LIST = 'mailman'
DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'mail.domain1.tld'
DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'mail.domain1.tld'
DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'https://%s/mailman/'
PUBLIC_ARCHIVE_URL = 'https://%(hostname)s/pipermail/%(listname)s'
# Clear the Defaults.py VIRTUAL_HOSTS entry
VIRTUAL_HOSTS.clear()
add_virtualhost('lists.domain2.tld','lists.domain2.tld')
add_virtualhost('lists.domain3.tld','lists.domain3.tld')
add_virtualhost('lists.domain4.tld','lists.domain4.tld')
add_virtualhost('lists.domain5.tld','lists.domain5.tld')
VERP_PASSWORD_REMINDERS = Yes
VERP_PERSONALIZED_DELIVERIES = Yes
VERP_DELIVERY_INTERVAL = Yes
VERP_CONFIRMATIONS = Yes
VERP_DELIVERY_INTERVAL = 1
OWNERS_CAN_ENABLE_PERSONALIZATION = 1

From mark at msapiro.net  Sat Feb 19 15:57:25 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 06:57:25 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] https and virtual domains
In-Reply-To: <4D5E99F7.4060607@networktest.com>
Message-ID: <PC195201102190657250584092b0a61@Notebook-09>

David Newman wrote:
>
>With the mm.cfg config pasted below, clicking the archives link on a
>list page for lists.domain2.tld redirects to
>
>https://mail.domain1.tld/pipermail/listname
>
>which fails because the list name is associated with domain2.tld and not
>domain1.tld.


Do you mean the link points to
https://mail.domain1.tld/pipermail/listname or that the link points to
https://lists.domain2.tld/pipermail/listname but when you follow it,
it is redirected.

If you mean the former, run Mailman's

 bin/withlist -l -r fix_url listname -u lists.domain2.tld

and that should fix it.

If you mean the latter, it is your web server configuration doing this.
To say more, we'd need to see the relevant pieces of your web server
configuration.


>Not sure if this is related, but this is after running 'withlist -l -r
>fix_url listname' on domain2.tld's mailing list and restarting mailman.


If you mean the above literally, that's the problem. You're missing the
-u lists.domain2.tld at the end of the above so fix_url used the
DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST and DEFAULT_URL_HOST values. Also, it is not
necessary to restart Mailman after running fix_url unless you also
made mm_cfg.py changes.


>Thanks in advance for configuration clues.


The following looks good.


># Put YOUR site-specific settings below this line.
>MTA = 'Postfix'
>MAILMAN_SITE_LIST = 'mailman'
>DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'mail.domain1.tld'
>DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'mail.domain1.tld'
>DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'https://%s/mailman/'
>PUBLIC_ARCHIVE_URL = 'https://%(hostname)s/pipermail/%(listname)s'
># Clear the Defaults.py VIRTUAL_HOSTS entry
>VIRTUAL_HOSTS.clear()
>add_virtualhost('lists.domain2.tld','lists.domain2.tld')
>add_virtualhost('lists.domain3.tld','lists.domain3.tld')
>add_virtualhost('lists.domain4.tld','lists.domain4.tld')
>add_virtualhost('lists.domain5.tld','lists.domain5.tld')
>VERP_PASSWORD_REMINDERS = Yes
>VERP_PERSONALIZED_DELIVERIES = Yes
>VERP_DELIVERY_INTERVAL = Yes
>VERP_CONFIRMATIONS = Yes
>VERP_DELIVERY_INTERVAL = 1
>OWNERS_CAN_ENABLE_PERSONALIZATION = 1

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Sat Feb 19 15:40:59 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 06:40:59 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Keep receiving from MYLIST-bounces a
	notificationthat is wrong
In-Reply-To: <20110219115620.GB26496@lacl.fr>
Message-ID: <PC195201102190640590895092b0bba@Notebook-09>

Olivier Michel wrote:
>
>I keep receiving from a list called MYLIST a moderator request for a
>waiting message that should be considered (all traffic is moderated on
>that list) while actually there is no such message to be moderated. I
>looked through the FAQ of Mailman, through the pending queues and the
>postfix sending queue and everything is empty.


See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/EoCE>.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From dnewman at networktest.com  Sat Feb 19 23:25:51 2011
From: dnewman at networktest.com (David Newman)
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 14:25:51 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] https and virtual domains
In-Reply-To: <PC195201102190657250584092b0a61@Notebook-09>
References: <PC195201102190657250584092b0a61@Notebook-09>
Message-ID: <4D60436F.2050809@networktest.com>



On 2/19/11 6:57 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> David Newman wrote:
>>
>> With the mm.cfg config pasted below, clicking the archives link on a
>> list page for lists.domain2.tld redirects to
>>
>> https://mail.domain1.tld/pipermail/listname
>>
>> which fails because the list name is associated with domain2.tld and not
>> domain1.tld.
> 
> 
> Do you mean the link points to
> https://mail.domain1.tld/pipermail/listname or that the link points to
> https://lists.domain2.tld/pipermail/listname but when you follow it,
> it is redirected.
> 
> If you mean the former, run Mailman's
> 
>  bin/withlist -l -r fix_url listname -u lists.domain2.tld
> 
> and that should fix it.


Thanks, Mark. Adding '-u hostname' did the trick.

I'd suggest adding this to the FAQ, which currently does not mention the
-u switch:

http://wiki.list.org/display/DOC/4.27+Securing+Mailman%27s+web+GUI+by+using+Secure+HTTP-SSL

dn




> 
> If you mean the latter, it is your web server configuration doing this.
> To say more, we'd need to see the relevant pieces of your web server
> configuration.
> 
> 
>> Not sure if this is related, but this is after running 'withlist -l -r
>> fix_url listname' on domain2.tld's mailing list and restarting mailman.
> 
> 
> If you mean the above literally, that's the problem. You're missing the
> -u lists.domain2.tld at the end of the above so fix_url used the
> DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST and DEFAULT_URL_HOST values. Also, it is not
> necessary to restart Mailman after running fix_url unless you also
> made mm_cfg.py changes.
> 
> 
>> Thanks in advance for configuration clues.
> 
> 
> The following looks good.
> 
> 
>> # Put YOUR site-specific settings below this line.
>> MTA = 'Postfix'
>> MAILMAN_SITE_LIST = 'mailman'
>> DEFAULT_EMAIL_HOST = 'mail.domain1.tld'
>> DEFAULT_URL_HOST = 'mail.domain1.tld'
>> DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'https://%s/mailman/'
>> PUBLIC_ARCHIVE_URL = 'https://%(hostname)s/pipermail/%(listname)s'
>> # Clear the Defaults.py VIRTUAL_HOSTS entry
>> VIRTUAL_HOSTS.clear()
>> add_virtualhost('lists.domain2.tld','lists.domain2.tld')
>> add_virtualhost('lists.domain3.tld','lists.domain3.tld')
>> add_virtualhost('lists.domain4.tld','lists.domain4.tld')
>> add_virtualhost('lists.domain5.tld','lists.domain5.tld')
>> VERP_PASSWORD_REMINDERS = Yes
>> VERP_PERSONALIZED_DELIVERIES = Yes
>> VERP_DELIVERY_INTERVAL = Yes
>> VERP_CONFIRMATIONS = Yes
>> VERP_DELIVERY_INTERVAL = 1
>> OWNERS_CAN_ENABLE_PERSONALIZATION = 1
> 

From aylinara at student.uef.fi  Sun Feb 20 11:42:42 2011
From: aylinara at student.uef.fi (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Alex_Ylin=E4r=E4?=)
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 10:42:42 +0000
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman not sending messages
Message-ID: <703369D2-2E11-4A70-AD85-54871BB59196@student.uef.fi>

Hi,

Tried to find the answer from the website but didn't find it, so trying this way. 

I have this problem that mailman sends randomly messages to the list subscribers. Not to random members but in random occasions. For example: myself, as a administrator, have succeeded couple of times but there has been times that even I was unable to send messages. Also some subscribers have had this kind of experiences. The most interesting thing in this thing is that nevertheless all messages can be found from the archives. Unfortunately not in subscribers inboxes... Hope that I did explain this right...

Any ideas?


Yours sincerely from freezing Finland

Alex Ylin?r?

From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Feb 20 16:38:11 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 07:38:11 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] https and virtual domains
In-Reply-To: <4D60436F.2050809@networktest.com>
Message-ID: <PC1952011022007381106664f8706a5@Notebook-09>

David Newman wrote:
>
>Thanks, Mark. Adding '-u hostname' did the trick.
>
>I'd suggest adding this to the FAQ, which currently does not mention the
>-u switch:
>
>http://wiki.list.org/display/DOC/4.27+Securing+Mailman%27s+web+GUI+by+using+Secure+HTTP-SSL


I have updated the FAQ. Thank you.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Feb 20 17:18:01 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 08:18:01 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman not sending messages
In-Reply-To: <703369D2-2E11-4A70-AD85-54871BB59196@student.uef.fi>
References: <703369D2-2E11-4A70-AD85-54871BB59196@student.uef.fi>
Message-ID: <4D613EB9.8050509@msapiro.net>

On 2/20/2011 2:42 AM, Alex Ylin?r? wrote:
> 
> I have this problem that mailman sends randomly messages to the list
> subscribers. Not to random members but in random occasions. For
> example: myself, as a administrator, have succeeded couple of times
> but there has been times that even I was unable to send messages.
> Also some subscribers have had this kind of experiences. The most
> interesting thing in this thing is that nevertheless all messages can
> be found from the archives. Unfortunately not in subscribers
> inboxes... Hope that I did explain this right...


Since the messages are archived, the post's are reaching Mailman and
being processed. The problem is in delivery.

Check Mailman's smtp, smtp-failure, bounce and error logs. Also check
the MTA's logs.

See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/A4E9>.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From raven at vp44.net  Mon Feb 21 22:53:06 2011
From: raven at vp44.net (Raven)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 22:53:06 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] *list*-manager getting mail
Message-ID: <1298325186.3146.4.camel@osmosis.gnet.eu>

Hi all.
I run a mailman installation with a couple hundreds users and since last
system update (Debian mailman_2.1.13-4.1_i386), I am getting a copy of
all messages in the "*list*-manager at domain.com" mailbox.
No settings have been changed in ages so I'm wondering why this is
happening.
Any clues?

-RV



From sisil at glplonline.com  Tue Feb 22 04:18:39 2011
From: sisil at glplonline.com (Sisil Perera)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:48:39 +0530
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman With Exchnage
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinbb9d24uukOgC-=040h6oHZf-o-BuXMAKY1qE3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTinbb9d24uukOgC-=040h6oHZf-o-BuXMAKY1qE3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimng-18e7ThscT91jR9Mq+yHAbdTmsUfmUGzGZo@mail.gmail.com>

 Dear Team

I am working system integrated (SI) company. one of my customer using this
mailman software for list Management. now he need to install Exchange for
mail server and keep this mailman for list management. please advice me for
this solution.


-- 
*Sisil Perera
Solution Specialist
(MSc-TT, CCSP, CCNA, MCSE+S, DCSE)

*Greenwich Lanka Pvt Ltd
Level 2, No. 451, Galle Road,
Colombo 03, Sri Lanka.
Phone:     +94 (0) 11 7724280
Mobile:     +94 (0) 77 2078561






-- 
*Sisil Perera
Solution Specialist
(MSc, CCSP, CCNA, MCSE+S, DCSE)

*Greenwich Lanka Pvt Ltd
Level 2, No. 451, Galle Road,
Colombo 03, Sri Lanka.
Phone:     +94 (0) 11 7724280
Mobile:     +94 (0) 77 2078561

From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Feb 22 17:19:30 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:19:30 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] *list*-manager getting mail
In-Reply-To: <1298325186.3146.4.camel@osmosis.gnet.eu>
Message-ID: <PC195201102220819300407dafc91b5@Notebook-09>

Raven wrote:

>I run a mailman installation with a couple hundreds users and since last
>system update (Debian mailman_2.1.13-4.1_i386), I am getting a copy of
>all messages in the "*list*-manager at domain.com" mailbox.
>No settings have been changed in ages so I'm wondering why this is
>happening.
>Any clues?


Since this happened with a Debian package following a Debian upgrade,
perhaps you should ask Debian.

That said, we might be able to help if you post a copy of one such
message with all headers. Email addresses and content may be edited
for privacy, but we'd need to see all the headers.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Tue Feb 22 17:57:37 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:57:37 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman With Exchnage
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimng-18e7ThscT91jR9Mq+yHAbdTmsUfmUGzGZo@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <PC195201102220857370279dafc913c@Notebook-09>

Sisil Perera wrote:
>
>I am working system integrated (SI) company. one of my customer using this
>mailman software for list Management. now he need to install Exchange for
>mail server and keep this mailman for list management. please advice me for
>this solution.


See <http://www.google.com/search?q=mailman+with+exchange>.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From sisil at glplonline.com  Wed Feb 23 04:56:36 2011
From: sisil at glplonline.com (Sisil Perera)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 09:26:36 +0530
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman With Exchnage
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinbb9d24uukOgC-=040h6oHZf-o-BuXMAKY1qE3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTinbb9d24uukOgC-=040h6oHZf-o-BuXMAKY1qE3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimQcaC7j5eO=r=nk_YoGf6z5we8o-4VUCOdcLa0@mail.gmail.com>

 Dear Team

I am working system integrated (SI) company. one of my customer using this
mailman software for list Management. now he need to install Exchange for
mail server and keep this mailman for list management. please can you advice
me for this solution.


-- 
*Sisil Perera
Solution Specialist
(MSc, CCSP, CCNA, MCSE+S, DCSE)

*Greenwich Lanka Pvt Ltd
Level 2, No. 451, Galle Road,
Colombo 03, Sri Lanka.
Phone:     +94 (0) 11 7724280
Mobile:     +94 (0) 77 2078561

From houghtonator at optusnet.com.au  Wed Feb 23 03:42:10 2011
From: houghtonator at optusnet.com.au (Steve Houghton)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 13:42:10 +1100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] not sending confirmation requests
Message-ID: <201102230242.p1N2gAlo008106@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20110223/0dd855ef/attachment.ksh>

From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb 23 15:34:21 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 06:34:21 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] not sending confirmation requests
In-Reply-To: <201102230242.p1N2gAlo008106@mail05.syd.optusnet.com.au>
Message-ID: <PC1952011022306342100352f54d038@Notebook-09>

Steve Houghton wrote:
>
>I am list admin of a list with about 100 subscribers. Confirmation emails are not being sent when a subscription request is submitted from the general list info page. Appreciate any help.


Are other messages (posts, etc.) sent OK?

Is the list's subscribe_policy set to Confirm or Confirm and approve?

What response does the user get when the subscribe form is submitted?

Is there anything in Mailman's 'error', 'smtp' or 'smtp-failure' logs
with timestamp of the time of form submission?

Is the subscription actually pending? Use Mailman's

  bin/dumpdb lists/LISTNAME/pending.pck

or the script at <http://www.msapiro.net/scripts/list_pending> to see.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb 23 15:57:00 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 06:57:00 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Mailman With Exchnage
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimQcaC7j5eO=r=nk_YoGf6z5we8o-4VUCOdcLa0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTinbb9d24uukOgC-=040h6oHZf-o-BuXMAKY1qE3@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimQcaC7j5eO=r=nk_YoGf6z5we8o-4VUCOdcLa0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D65203C.7030304@msapiro.net>

On 2/22/2011 7:56 PM, Sisil Perera wrote:
> 
> I am working system integrated (SI) company. one of my customer using this
> mailman software for list Management. now he need to install Exchange for
> mail server and keep this mailman for list management. please can you advice
> me for this solution.


This is the same as the post at
<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2011-February/071158.html>
which was answered at
<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2011-February/071160.html>.
Did you not receive that answer?

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From bsfinkel at anl.gov  Wed Feb 23 17:06:19 2011
From: bsfinkel at anl.gov (Barry Finkel)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 10:06:19 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Question About last_mailman_version During
	Migratrion
Message-ID: <4D65307B.90402@anl.gov>

I am testing migrating Mailman from an Ubuntu Dapper system with
my own Mailman 2.1.14 package built from the SourceForge source
to an Ubuntu Lucid system with the Debian Lucid Mailman 2.1.13
package.

I tested the Lucid system, and then I copied

      /var/lib/mailman/archives
      /var/lib/mailman/data
      /var/lib/mailman/lists
      /var/lib/mailman/qfiles     [no files present]

from my test Dapper to the Lucid system.  I then rebuilt the

      /var/lib/mailman/data/aliases

file (each system has test lists).  The question regards

      /var/lib/mailman/data/last_mailman_version

The current file on Lucid has "0x2010ef0", and before the merge it had
"0x2010df0".  I have not done extensive testing with the lists I copied,
but I had no trouble accessing the admin web pages for a few lists.
Given that the Lucid installation is 2.1.13, should the
last_mailman_version be set back to "0x2010df0"?  I am assuming that
there will be no problems with the list config files in

      /var/lib/mailman/lists

between 2.1.13 and 2.1.14.  I have not loooked in detail at the Debian
patches to 2.1.13, other than to discard most of them when I attempted
to build a 2.1.14 Lucid package from the SourceForge source.  The only
problem I had in building the package is that is was built for AMD64
(as I have on Dapper), not for X86-64 (as I have on Lucid).  I have not
yet had the time to determine why, as I am told that I have to install
the Debian Lucid package.  Thanks.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barry S. Finkel
Computing and Information Systems Division
Argonne National Laboratory          Phone:    +1 (630) 252-7277
9700 South Cass Avenue               Facsimile:+1 (630) 252-4601
Building 240, Room 5.B.8             Internet: BSFinkel at anl.gov
Argonne, IL   60439-4828             IBMMAIL:  I1004994

From LarryH at Havard.com  Wed Feb 23 17:14:50 2011
From: LarryH at Havard.com (Larry Havard)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 11:14:50 -0500
Subject: [Mailman-Users] is there a setting for bouncing message with
	multiple to's:
Message-ID: <00c201cbd374$cc0ad480$64207d80$@Havard.com>

I have looked and cannot find it. 
Is there a setting for bouncing message with multiple to's or to: and CC: 

We want mail coming in to our list to be only for our list and not being
sent to others in the same message.

Thanks
Larry Havard


HAVARD
& ASSOCIATES
3075 Charlevoix Drive? SE
Grand Rapids, MI 49546
616 458 9333 Voice
616 588 6064 Fax





From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb 23 18:06:54 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 11:06:54 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Question About last_mailman_version
	During	Migratrion
In-Reply-To: <4D65307B.90402@anl.gov>
References: <4D65307B.90402@anl.gov>
Message-ID: <f243531d-a25c-43a8-8002-8e244cddfcba@email.android.com>



"Barry Finkel" <bsfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:

>I tested the Lucid system, and then I copied
>
>      /var/lib/mailman/archives
>      /var/lib/mailman/data
>      /var/lib/mailman/lists
>      /var/lib/mailman/qfiles     [no files present]
>
>from my test Dapper to the Lucid system.  I then rebuilt the
>
>      /var/lib/mailman/data/aliases
>
>file (each system has test lists).  The question regards
>
>      /var/lib/mailman/data/last_mailman_version
>
>The current file on Lucid has "0x2010ef0", and before the merge it had
>"0x2010df0".  


It is normally not recommended to copy the data directory. In any case, I *think* when you start mailman the last_mailman_version file will be overwritten, and this file is only used to determine whether to run bin/update when you install a new version.

If the file is not overwritten it would be good to restore  the original data.


> I have not done extensive testing with the lists I
>copied,
>but I had no trouble accessing the admin web pages for a few lists.
>Given that the Lucid installation is 2.1.13, should the
>last_mailman_version be set back to "0x2010df0"?  I am assuming that
>there will be no problems with the list config files in
>
>      /var/lib/mailman/lists
>
>between 2.1.13 and 2.1.14.


Mailman upgrades config.pck files as necessary on the fly. It doesn't downgrade, but that won't be a problem here.


-- 
Mark Sapiro - mark at msapiro.net

Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb 23 18:13:15 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 11:13:15 -0600
Subject: [Mailman-Users] is there a setting for bouncing message
	with	multiple to's:
In-Reply-To: <00c201cbd374$cc0ad480$64207d80$@Havard.com>
References: <00c201cbd374$cc0ad480$64207d80$@Havard.com>
Message-ID: <a2741e39-198e-4d4b-96b6-a98608e2c19b@email.android.com>



"Larry Havard" <LarryH at Havard.com> wrote:

>I have looked and cannot find it. 
>Is there a setting for bouncing message with multiple to's or to: and
>CC: 
>
>We want mail coming in to our list to be only for our list and not
>being
>sent to others in the same message.



The setting is in Privacy options... -> Recipient filters; something like max recipients.
  
-- 
Mark Sapiro - mark at msapiro.net

Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

From mark at msapiro.net  Wed Feb 23 20:59:22 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 11:59:22 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Question About last_mailman_version During
	Migratrion
In-Reply-To: <f243531d-a25c-43a8-8002-8e244cddfcba@email.android.com>
References: <4D65307B.90402@anl.gov>
	<f243531d-a25c-43a8-8002-8e244cddfcba@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <4D65671A.3060804@msapiro.net>

On 2/23/2011 9:06 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> 
>  In any case, I *think* when you start mailman the last_mailman_version file will be overwritten.


This is not coeerct. Only bin/update writes last_mailman_version so it
would be good to restore  the original data manually.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From stephen at xemacs.org  Thu Feb 24 04:55:42 2011
From: stephen at xemacs.org (Stephen J. Turnbull)
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 12:55:42 +0900
Subject: [Mailman-Users] is there a setting for bouncing
	message	with	multiple to's:
In-Reply-To: <a2741e39-198e-4d4b-96b6-a98608e2c19b@email.android.com>
References: <00c201cbd374$cc0ad480$64207d80$@Havard.com>
	<a2741e39-198e-4d4b-96b6-a98608e2c19b@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <8739neytkx.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>

Mark Sapiro writes:

 > "Larry Havard" <LarryH at Havard.com> wrote:
 > 
 > >I have looked and cannot find it. 
 > >Is there a setting for bouncing message with multiple to's or to: and
 > >CC: 
 > >
 > >We want mail coming in to our list to be only for our list and not
 > >being
 > >sent to others in the same message.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > The setting is in Privacy options... -> Recipient filters; something like max recipients.

It's probably obvious, but ... you also need to set the list to
require its own address (or aliases, when there are any) as a
recipient.

Also, note that you can't prevent the mail from going to third parties
as a BCC.

From Dave.Anderson at ufv.ca  Fri Feb 25 00:54:30 2011
From: Dave.Anderson at ufv.ca (Dave Anderson)
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 23:54:30 +0000
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Append a list owner to all lists
Message-ID: <543E569A8BED2846A6DABBC6CD453B200B60D01F@EMPIRE.ad.ufv.ca>

Hello,

All of our lists have separate list owners, but I would like to add a secondary list owner to all the mailing lists, is there a way to do this by command line?

Regards,
Dave Anderson
System Administrator
University of the Fraser Valley



From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 25 03:20:09 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 18:20:09 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Append a list owner to all lists
In-Reply-To: <543E569A8BED2846A6DABBC6CD453B200B60D01F@EMPIRE.ad.ufv.ca>
Message-ID: <PC1952011022418200902194f3eb9a4@MSAPIRO>

Dave Anderson wrote:
>
>All of our lists have separate list owners, but I would like to add a secondary list owner to all the mailing lists, is there a way to do this by command line?


There are a couple of ways to do this. The most flexible is probably
the withlist script at
<http://www.msapiro.net/scripts/change_admins.py> (mirrored at
<http://fog.ccsf.edu/~msapiro/scripts/change_admins.py>).

Another way to do it would be a shell script similar to

#!/bin/sh
f=`mktemp`
echo > $f "mlist.owner += ['aditional_owner at example.com']"
cd /path/to/mailman
for list in `bin/list_lists --bare`; do
  bin/config_list -i $f $list
done
rm $f

The drawback of this shell script is it doesn't check if
'aditional_owner at example.com' is already an owner, and if it is, the
list will wind up with a duplicate in owner. This is not an issue with
the change_admins.py script as it does check.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From phanh at canby.k12.or.us  Fri Feb 25 03:55:22 2011
From: phanh at canby.k12.or.us (Hung Phan)
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 18:55:22 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Emails to a specific email domain get error
Message-ID: <FED599AC-0248-4128-982E-D3300A0AC505@canby.k12.or.us>

Hello,

We are having an issue with messages sent out through Mailman server that don't reach a specific email domain. In the exim main log, we see these error messages repeatedly show up:

email at thatdomain.com R=dnslookup T=remote_smtp defer (-53): retry time not reached for any host
or
email at thatdomain.com R=dnslookup T=remote_smtp defer (110): Connection timed out

Our Mailman server is not on any blacklist. What would likely be the issue here?


Thank you in advance for any advice,



From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 25 05:29:47 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 20:29:47 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Emails to a specific email domain get error
In-Reply-To: <FED599AC-0248-4128-982E-D3300A0AC505@canby.k12.or.us>
Message-ID: <PC1952011022420294700327ff3384f@MSAPIRO>

Hung Phan wrote:
>
>We are having an issue with messages sent out through Mailman server that don't reach a specific email domain. In the exim main log, we see these error messages repeatedly show up:
>
>email at thatdomain.com R=dnslookup T=remote_smtp defer (-53): retry time not reached for any host
>or
>email at thatdomain.com R=dnslookup T=remote_smtp defer (110): Connection timed out
>
>Our Mailman server is not on any blacklist. What would likely be the issue here?


The mail exchange server (or server) for thatdomain.com is not
accepting port 25 connects from your server. The server may be
temporarily down or blocking your IP or just misconfigured so no mail
can be sent to that domain.

Only the admins of that server can tell you which and if they are
blocking your IP, why.

I don't think this is a Mailman issue. If try to send mail directly
from your server via some MUA, you'll see the same result.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From phanh at canby.k12.or.us  Fri Feb 25 17:33:15 2011
From: phanh at canby.k12.or.us (Hung Phan)
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 08:33:15 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Stop Mailman from re-send messages
Message-ID: <8D4F0388-CDD1-4E90-836F-94CAD47EBCAA@canby.k12.or.us>

Hello,

How do we stop Mailman from re-sending out messages in the query? and How do we clear the entire query out? Can we remove certain messages from the query? Mailman version 2.1.12 and Exim 4

Thank you for your advice,
 

From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 25 18:05:01 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 09:05:01 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Stop Mailman from re-send messages
In-Reply-To: <8D4F0388-CDD1-4E90-836F-94CAD47EBCAA@canby.k12.or.us>
Message-ID: <PC1952011022509050107963367e79d@MSAPIRO>

Hung Phan wrote:
>
>How do we stop Mailman from re-sending out messages in the query? and How do we clear the entire query out? Can we remove certain messages from the query? Mailman version 2.1.12 and Exim 4


To clear the retry queue, do

  rm /path/to/mailman/qfiles/retry/*

To prevent messages from being queued for retry in the first place you
could figure out why Exim is returning a temporary failure status (4xx
or 552) for some or all recipients, and make it return a permanent
failure instead.

To make Mailman retry only once instead of for the default 5 days, set

DELIVERY_RETRY_PERIOD = 0

in mm_cfg.py.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From mark at msapiro.net  Fri Feb 25 18:36:18 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 09:36:18 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Stop Mailman from re-send messages
In-Reply-To: <PC1952011022509050107963367e79d@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <PC1952011022509361803123367e5ca@MSAPIRO>

Mark Sapiro wrote:

>Hung Phan wrote:
>>
>>How do we stop Mailman from re-sending out messages in the query? and How do we clear the entire query out? Can we remove certain messages from the query? Mailman version 2.1.12 and Exim 4
>
>
>To clear the retry queue, do
>
>  rm /path/to/mailman/qfiles/retry/*


And I neglected to say to remove only certain messages, use Mailman's
bin/show_qfiles or bin/dumpdb to examine files in
/path/to/mailman/qfiles/retry/ and then just remove the ones you don't
want. Note that of the two, only dumpdb shows the metadata that
includes the recipient list, but show_qfiles accepts multiple file
arguments and dumpdb does not.

Also, if this question relates to your prior post about "Emails to a
specific email domain get error", those messages are queued in Exim,
not Mailman. See "man 8 exim" for information on exim queues.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From alexis at venenux.org  Sat Feb 26 21:59:33 2011
From: alexis at venenux.org (alexis at venenux.org)
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 21:59:33 +0100
Subject: [Mailman-Users] =?iso-8859-1?q?mailman_and_=D1?=
Message-ID: <d0c037c174b1867e93e963d018f82f12.squirrel@webmail.venenux.org>

Hello

I happened to manage a mailing list of Spain. I want to use the name
Espa?a as "real name" and as "subject prefix", but I don't know if the
Spanish character "?" can cause problems. Can I do?
I have access only to the Mailman administrative interface, not the server
itself. The Mailman version is 2.1.11.

Thanks!


From mark at msapiro.net  Sun Feb 27 19:56:37 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:56:37 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] =?iso-8859-1?q?mailman_and_=D1?=
In-Reply-To: <d0c037c174b1867e93e963d018f82f12.squirrel@webmail.venenux.org>
References: <d0c037c174b1867e93e963d018f82f12.squirrel@webmail.venenux.org>
Message-ID: <4D6A9E65.20109@msapiro.net>

On 2/26/2011 12:59 PM, alexis at venenux.org wrote:
> Hello
> 
> I happened to manage a mailing list of Spain. I want to use the name
> Espa?a as "real name" and as "subject prefix", but I don't know if the
> Spanish character "?" can cause problems. Can I do?


There is no problem with Espa?a as the subject_prefix.

For various reasons, a list's name is restricted. Since it must be the
local part of an email address and normally appears in the To: header of
posts, it must not contain non-ascii characters. Also, because in many
installations, it also appears in pipe commands in MTA aliases, it must
not contain shell metacharacters. By default, it is restricted to
characters from the class [-+_.=a-z0-9] although this can be overridden
in mm_cfg.py.

Since the list's real_name must differ from the actual list name only by
case, and espa?a is not an allowable list name, Espa?a is not allowable
as a list's real_name.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan


From phanh at canby.k12.or.us  Mon Feb 28 20:03:09 2011
From: phanh at canby.k12.or.us (Hung Phan)
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:03:09 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Stop Mailman from re-send messages
In-Reply-To: <PC1952011022509361803123367e5ca@MSAPIRO>
References: <PC1952011022509361803123367e5ca@MSAPIRO>
Message-ID: <30FF6DC8-9F8A-4DA7-A0B8-8000A820B3E3@canby.k12.or.us>

Thank you very much for your answer, Mark.
We follow this Exim cheatsheet http://bradthemad.org/tech/notes/exim_cheatsheet.php and clear out the Exim queries. We, however, are not very clear about the suffix D denote in front of some recipients. Anyone has knowledge about the suffix? 

Thank you,



On Feb 25, 2011, at 9:36 AM, Mark Sapiro wrote:

> Mark Sapiro wrote:
> 
>> Hung Phan wrote:
>>> 
>>> How do we stop Mailman from re-sending out messages in the query? and How do we clear the entire query out? Can we remove certain messages from the query? Mailman version 2.1.12 and Exim 4
>> 
>> 
>> To clear the retry queue, do
>> 
>> rm /path/to/mailman/qfiles/retry/*
> 
> 
> And I neglected to say to remove only certain messages, use Mailman's
> bin/show_qfiles or bin/dumpdb to examine files in
> /path/to/mailman/qfiles/retry/ and then just remove the ones you don't
> want. Note that of the two, only dumpdb shows the metadata that
> includes the recipient list, but show_qfiles accepts multiple file
> arguments and dumpdb does not.
> 
> Also, if this question relates to your prior post about "Emails to a
> specific email domain get error", those messages are queued in Exim,
> not Mailman. See "man 8 exim" for information on exim queues.
> 
> -- 
> Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan
> 


From mark at msapiro.net  Mon Feb 28 23:08:25 2011
From: mark at msapiro.net (Mark Sapiro)
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:08:25 -0800
Subject: [Mailman-Users] Stop Mailman from re-send messages
In-Reply-To: <30FF6DC8-9F8A-4DA7-A0B8-8000A820B3E3@canby.k12.or.us>
Message-ID: <PC195201102281408250453982e269e@MSAPIRO>

Hung Phan wrote:

>We follow this Exim cheatsheet
>http://bradthemad.org/tech/notes/exim_cheatsheet.php and clear out the
>Exim queries. We, however, are not very clear about the suffix D denote
>in front of some recipients. Anyone has knowledge about the suffix?


It means the message has been delivered to that recipient or at least
accepted for delivery by that recipient's MX.

If you have further questions about Exim, see "man exim" or consider
the Exim-users mailing list
<http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users>.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan