postfixadmin-tracker Mailing List for PostfixAdmin (Page 33)
Brought to you by:
christian_boltz,
gingerdog
Menu
▾
▴
postfixadmin-tracker — Postfix Admin tracker notification - READ ONLY!
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2007 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(5) |
Oct
(67) |
Nov
(83) |
Dec
(47) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 |
Jan
(57) |
Feb
(15) |
Mar
(21) |
Apr
(38) |
May
(27) |
Jun
(38) |
Jul
(35) |
Aug
(50) |
Sep
(8) |
Oct
(9) |
Nov
(59) |
Dec
(59) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(27) |
Feb
(42) |
Mar
(63) |
Apr
(46) |
May
(26) |
Jun
(25) |
Jul
(40) |
Aug
(19) |
Sep
(17) |
Oct
(35) |
Nov
(26) |
Dec
(21) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(11) |
Feb
(19) |
Mar
(40) |
Apr
(25) |
May
(23) |
Jun
(17) |
Jul
(10) |
Aug
(18) |
Sep
(21) |
Oct
(12) |
Nov
(10) |
Dec
(22) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(30) |
Feb
(23) |
Mar
(23) |
Apr
(38) |
May
(32) |
Jun
(19) |
Jul
(20) |
Aug
(36) |
Sep
(11) |
Oct
(28) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(4) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(6) |
Feb
(3) |
Mar
(16) |
Apr
(28) |
May
(29) |
Jun
(10) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(3) |
Sep
|
Oct
(13) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(1) |
| 2013 |
Jan
(11) |
Feb
(7) |
Mar
(29) |
Apr
(2) |
May
(3) |
Jun
(15) |
Jul
(8) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(5) |
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(27) |
Dec
(81) |
| 2014 |
Jan
(12) |
Feb
(13) |
Mar
(5) |
Apr
|
May
(41) |
Jun
(16) |
Jul
(7) |
Aug
(10) |
Sep
(24) |
Oct
(50) |
Nov
|
Dec
(2) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(7) |
Apr
(20) |
May
(1) |
Jun
(3) |
Jul
(12) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(17) |
Oct
(5) |
Nov
(20) |
Dec
(10) |
| 2016 |
Jan
(10) |
Feb
(11) |
Mar
(22) |
Apr
(30) |
May
(33) |
Jun
(3) |
Jul
|
Aug
(12) |
Sep
(20) |
Oct
(11) |
Nov
(15) |
Dec
(8) |
| 2017 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
(11) |
Mar
(10) |
Apr
|
May
(3) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
(3) |
| 2018 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
(4) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2019 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(3) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2021 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-19 15:42:30
|
Bugs item #2814820, was opened at 2009-06-30 22:18 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nls You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2814820&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: v 2.3 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: nls (nls) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: crypt() is not used according to specs Initial Comment: In functions.inc.php, pacrypt() uses the php crypt() function the wrong way when processing MD5 hashes. For the salt, all 12 characters of the input password hash salt must be used, including the magic sequence and the closing dollar sign, for example: "$1$abcdefgh$". Otherwise the crypt() function generates the shorter DES password hashes and password comparison always fails. This problem has become apparent for me when I was trying to migrate a user db for postfixadmin, where user password hashes are stored as DES for some users, and as MD5 for others. pacrypt() would be able to handle both, but currently it doesn't because of the forementioned mistake. Simply using $salt = "\$1\$${split_salt[2]}\$"; solves the problem. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: nls (nls) Date: 2009-07-19 17:42 Message: Additionally, please have a look at the official examples provided on the documentation page you have linked (and their included comments). Althought they're not explicitly formed documentation paragraphs, they seem to back what I have already said on the subject. If you see my reasoning acceptable, I'm happy to provide a patch you might want to apply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: nls (nls) Date: 2009-07-19 17:35 Message: Indeed, but it does work this way: if the salt length is less than 12, the short crypt sequence is used. If it is 12, then the salted MD5 crypt variant is used. If you pass the 12 characters of the salt that includes all separator dollar signs, it creates the proper MD5 hash. Otherwise it falls back to the shorter variant. I've applied the mentioned fixes in my installation and they work as I have already described; encodes both kind of hashes properly and all my users can log in. Maybe I should ask for a clarification of the PHP docs from the PHP documentation maintainers? Whatever the case, it is not working properly in PostfixAdmin right now. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-19 15:04 Message: err http://php.net/crypt doesn't mention anything about a trailing $ for crypt's salt field. David. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: nls (nls) Date: 2009-06-30 23:20 Message: And one thing i forgot, related to this problem: the ereg expression is written as ereg ("\$1\$", $pw_db), and that is wrong. Instead it should be written as ereg ("\\$1\\$", $pw_db)), with double backslashes. Otherwise the if () will never evaluate true when an MD5 hash is passed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2814820&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-19 15:35:58
|
Bugs item #2814820, was opened at 2009-06-30 22:18 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nls You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2814820&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: v 2.3 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: nls (nls) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: crypt() is not used according to specs Initial Comment: In functions.inc.php, pacrypt() uses the php crypt() function the wrong way when processing MD5 hashes. For the salt, all 12 characters of the input password hash salt must be used, including the magic sequence and the closing dollar sign, for example: "$1$abcdefgh$". Otherwise the crypt() function generates the shorter DES password hashes and password comparison always fails. This problem has become apparent for me when I was trying to migrate a user db for postfixadmin, where user password hashes are stored as DES for some users, and as MD5 for others. pacrypt() would be able to handle both, but currently it doesn't because of the forementioned mistake. Simply using $salt = "\$1\$${split_salt[2]}\$"; solves the problem. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: nls (nls) Date: 2009-07-19 17:35 Message: Indeed, but it does work this way: if the salt length is less than 12, the short crypt sequence is used. If it is 12, then the salted MD5 crypt variant is used. If you pass the 12 characters of the salt that includes all separator dollar signs, it creates the proper MD5 hash. Otherwise it falls back to the shorter variant. I've applied the mentioned fixes in my installation and they work as I have already described; encodes both kind of hashes properly and all my users can log in. Maybe I should ask for a clarification of the PHP docs from the PHP documentation maintainers? Whatever the case, it is not working properly in PostfixAdmin right now. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-19 15:04 Message: err http://php.net/crypt doesn't mention anything about a trailing $ for crypt's salt field. David. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: nls (nls) Date: 2009-06-30 23:20 Message: And one thing i forgot, related to this problem: the ereg expression is written as ereg ("\$1\$", $pw_db), and that is wrong. Instead it should be written as ereg ("\\$1\\$", $pw_db)), with double backslashes. Otherwise the if () will never evaluate true when an MD5 hash is passed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2814820&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-19 13:04:06
|
Bugs item #2814820, was opened at 2009-06-30 20:18 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gingerdog You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2814820&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: v 2.3 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: nls (nls) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: crypt() is not used according to specs Initial Comment: In functions.inc.php, pacrypt() uses the php crypt() function the wrong way when processing MD5 hashes. For the salt, all 12 characters of the input password hash salt must be used, including the magic sequence and the closing dollar sign, for example: "$1$abcdefgh$". Otherwise the crypt() function generates the shorter DES password hashes and password comparison always fails. This problem has become apparent for me when I was trying to migrate a user db for postfixadmin, where user password hashes are stored as DES for some users, and as MD5 for others. pacrypt() would be able to handle both, but currently it doesn't because of the forementioned mistake. Simply using $salt = "\$1\$${split_salt[2]}\$"; solves the problem. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-19 13:04 Message: err http://php.net/crypt doesn't mention anything about a trailing $ for crypt's salt field. David. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: nls (nls) Date: 2009-06-30 21:20 Message: And one thing i forgot, related to this problem: the ereg expression is written as ereg ("\$1\$", $pw_db), and that is wrong. Instead it should be written as ereg ("\\$1\\$", $pw_db)), with double backslashes. Otherwise the if () will never evaluate true when an MD5 hash is passed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2814820&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-19 12:35:08
|
Bugs item #2818862, was opened at 2009-07-09 06:27 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gingerdog You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818862&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: v 2.3 >Status: Closed >Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Ryow (ryowsuzuki) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: php >= 5.3: some functions are deprecated. Initial Comment: I equipped postfixadmin 2.3.5rc with php 5.3 and encountered some errors like this: Deprecated: Function ereg() is deprecated in /home/httpd/vhosts/p-macle.com/postfixadmin/functions.inc.php on line 19 After php5.3, ereg() is deprecated. (I fixed this code with strcmp()). Other deprecated functions are listed at the URL below: http://us2.php.net/manual/en/migration53.deprecated.php Would these future-deprecated functions be replaced to the compatible ones with the old php in the future release? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-19 12:35 Message: I believe I've made all the necessary changes to the code -at least there are no longer any ereg calls. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Ryow (ryowsuzuki) Date: 2009-07-10 02:54 Message: Thank you gingerdog for suggesting me make a patch. This is my first time to make a patch... but I made it anyway and uploaded. I don't know if it works good or not, though I tested it myself and worked fine. Please try it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-09 19:57 Message: Hi, Yes, removing ereg should be no hardship.I'd appreciate a patch if possible :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818862&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-19 12:31:17
|
Patches item #2818660, was opened at 2009-07-08 18:11 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gingerdog You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937966&aid=2818660&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Dmitry MiksIr (terrainc) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Different encrypt scheme for admins passwords Initial Comment: You can need use plaintext password for mailboxes (for support different auth schemes on client), but still wanna use crypt for admins password. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-19 12:31 Message: Hi! Thanks for the patch, will attempt to merge after 2.3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937966&aid=2818660&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-17 11:40:46
|
Bugs item #2823018, was opened at 2009-07-17 13:40 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by oscarek You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2823018&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: v 2.2 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Oskar Szafraniec (oscarek) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: already_notified subroutine - _pkey problem Initial Comment: I’m writing in subject of already_notified subroutine. As it’s written in comment there, violation of primary key can happen, and this is true. But after this comment is a line like this: if ($e !~ /_pkey/) { On my system it started to produce 2 things… First, the condition was always true, because the error message didn’t include the “_pkey” string. This can be because of mysql version (I have 5.0.81). Instead of key name the error message had only “key 1” string. Next, because of the above vacation.pl was sending response every time. On our system this was producing 2 vacation-response per email, because emails goes first to localhost for virus-check and then are sent again to the recipient. Both was also served by vacation.pl and produced an “out-of-office” email. This is my free-thoughts about why this was, as I don’t know so much how postfix works (this is our admin’s domain :) So my suggestion is to change maybe the condition to something like this: if ($e !~ /key 1/ && $e !~ /_pkey/) { Key 1 (I think) is always a PRIMARY key, so on my system I’m using just line like this now, with 100% success: if ($e !~ /key 1/) { As English is not my native language, if something is not clear, feel free to ask questions :) My MySQL version is 5.0.81. vacation_notification is as it should be, so it’s structure is not a case (I was checking this number of times today :) I hope my email will be useful. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2823018&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-16 22:25:06
|
Bugs item #2822779, was opened at 2009-07-17 00:25 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by christian_boltz You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2822779&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: SVN (please specify revision!) Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Christian Boltz (christian_boltz) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: show_popimap flag is case sensitive Initial Comment: SVN r673 I have a user that set the mailbox alias us...@ex... -> Us...@ex.... This uppercase "U" caused the show_popimap check not to flag the mailbox as "POP/IMAP". -> the check should not be case-sensitive (use strtolower()?) -> the other checks also need to be checked for similar issues ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2822779&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-14 07:33:15
|
Bugs item #2821172, was opened at 2009-07-14 09:33 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by ulfsimmer You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2821172&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: v 2.3 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Ulf Simmer (ulfsimmer) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: \r\n visible in automatic answer Initial Comment: When enabling vacation, the original sender gets the (automatic) answer with visible \r\n (carriage return, new line). Perl is v5.8.9 2009/07/14 09:14:04 DEBUG> /home/vacation/vacation.pl:401 main::send_vacation_email - Vacation response sent, Mail::Sendmail said : Mail::Sendmail v. 0.79 - Tue Jul 1 4 09:14:04 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2821172&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-12 16:47:09
|
Bugs item #2809905, was opened at 2009-06-21 17:23 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by normes You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2809905&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Database Group: v 2.3 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Filipe Fagundes (piovisqui) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: .deb package resquest the removal of mysql server Initial Comment: I have download the postfixadmin_2.3_RC5_all.deb on Ubuntu 9.04. When I asked the install the package requires the REMOVAL of mysql server 5.1 and mysql client 5.1 and the installation of mysql client 5.0. It does not ask the install of mysql server 5.0. I downloaded RC4 and it installed successful. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Norman Messtorff (normes) Date: 2009-07-12 18:47 Message: As I've expected, this isn't a fault in the PA package. In my fresh installed and up-to-date Ubuntu 9.04 test installation I installed the packages mysql-client-5.1 and mysql-server-5.1 via synaptic. When I tried to install the PA .deb, I got also asked to remove the packages and install mysql-client-5.0 and mysql-server-5.0. I've set in the depend/recommend field to the meta-packages "mysql-server" and "mysql-client", which is common practice. Ubuntu 9.04 points that meta-packages to the 5.0 version of mysql. I don't know why Ubuntu is shipping two versions of mysql and depend on the old one. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Norman Messtorff (normes) Date: 2009-06-28 23:15 Message: I'll check this behaviour in a fresh Ubuntu 9.04 environment the next days. We could have this issue in Ubuntu and possible Debian too, but i can't see the problem at first view. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-06-22 12:11 Message: the dependency on wwwconfig-common is now not an issue; the debian control file doesn't specify any version requirements for mysql/postgresql, so i'm not sure why you'd get these problem(s). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Bjorn (bjornnilsen) Date: 2009-06-22 02:14 Message: The dependancies on this latest deb are very restrictive and have caused issues for me as well. The new wwwconfig-common dependency means that this deb is no longer supported with Ubuntu 8.04. $ sudo dpkg -i postfixadmin_2.3rc5_all.deb Selecting previously deselected package postfixadmin. (Reading database ... 25961 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking postfixadmin (from postfixadmin_2.3rc5_all.deb) ... dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of postfixadmin: postfixadmin depends on wwwconfig-common (>= 0.2.0); however: Version of wwwconfig-common on system is 0.0.48. dpkg: error processing postfixadmin (--install): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: postfixadmin ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2809905&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-10 21:15:44
|
Bugs item #2818228, was opened at 2009-07-07 21:18 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by gingerdog You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818228&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stevan Bajic (sbajic) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Virtual Vacation and alias lookups don't work as expected Initial Comment: The current implementation in Virtual Vacation is from my viewpoint not taking full advantage of Postfix.Admin. Assuming the following scenario: domain: bajic.ch mailbox user: st...@ba... aliases for mailbox user: @bajic.ch -> st...@ba..., st...@ba... -> st...@ba... Now if I go and enable Virtual Vacation in Postfix.Admin a sender sending a mail to wha...@ba... will not get a vacation message. In the log I would see something like that (Postfix log): ----- Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Script argument SMTP recipient is : 'stevan#baj...@au...' and smtp_sender : 're...@do...' Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Converted autoreply mailbox back to normal style - from stevan#baj...@au... to st...@ba... Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Email headers have to: 'wha...@ba...' and From: '"Just some user" <re...@do...>' Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - smtp envelope recipient st...@ba... not found in the header recipients (wha...@ba... & ) (therefore they were bcc'ed, so won't send vacation message) Jul 7 20:54:06 theia postfix/pipe[15257]: ADF79823C02: to=<stevan#baj...@au...>, orig_to=<st...@ba...>, relay=vacation, delay=0.57, delays=0.13/0/0/0.43, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via vacation service ----- That debug message is wrong. One reason why it is wrong: BCC: If wha...@ba... would be a BCC recipient then wha...@ba... would automatically be moved to the TO header field on MY server. When I get the message I don't have a BCC header field. The SENDER however should see on his copy (in the send folder) that he BCC'ed me. But I should not see it. So the error message is wrong. The second issue is that it is true that stevan#baj...@au... (autoreply.vunet.local is my vacation domain) does not match wha...@ba... (stevan#baj...@au... => st...@ba... != wha...@ba...) in the headers. BUT how useful is Virtual Vacation if I have to enter for each and every alias I have in Postfix.Admin a new vacation? Beside that I can NOT add it (since I only can login with my real destination address (st...@ba...)) I find it unpractical do add multiple vacation messages for each and every alias. Virtual Vacation should from my viewpoint try harder to resolve an alias. All the information is there and just a bunch of additional lookups are needed to really resolve wha...@ba... to st...@ba... and then see that st...@ba... has a vacation active. On my older Postfix.Admin setup I have extended Virtual Vacation to offer more functionality the the original edition. For my new Postfix.Admin 2.3 installation I am probably not going again to add those features to Postfix.Admin but I need the alias lookup to work right. So I went and checked out the latest SVN today and changed Virtual Vacation to do proper alias lookups. All the things I mentioned above to not work have been fixed in the included Virtual Vacation Perl script. Additionally I did the following things as well: * fixed a bug/typo in the new Mail::Sender call (it's "$sender->SendLineEnc($body);" and not "$sender->SentLineEnc($body);". See the senD instead of senT?) * added lookups for "Alias Domains" * optimized alias lookup SQL clause * added code to deal with the case that a user can have: - mail address: "us...@do..." - alias/goto: "us...@do..., us...@gm..." or "us...@do..., us...@do..., us...@do..." => Virtual Vacation should (the attached one does) send a vacation message if some one would address us...@do... and us...@do... has vacation active * added some more mail headers to be checked (headers produced by common used Anti-Virus and Anti-Spam tools) * changed some comments (especially the one above strip_address) * removed the code responsible for the above (2nd paragraph) mentioned error condition (see the Postfix log above) * CC needs to be stripped as well else a CC recipient "1,2,3" <12...@do...> would wrongly be expanded/split to: * "1 * 2 * 3" <12...@do...> * Changed strip_address() to return RFC 821 style emails to be all in lowercase * Fixed all dash in a regexp to be escaped * Extended regexp in strip_address to match more valid characters: * Added some characters (except the # since it is used for the Virtual Vacation alias) mentioned in RFCs to the regexp => There are still cases not captured by the new regexp. Capturing them would be possible but I don't know how well Email::Valid would validate them? I have not spend time to look inside Email::Valid to see if it validates emails the right way. If some one has time then try to validate the following emails with Email::Valid: "me\@home"@domain.com "me@home"@domain.com you(firstname).there(lastname)@domain(secondlevel).com(topelevel) -> (everything in parentheses are comments. So the real recipient here would be "you...@do...". I know it's wicked but an absolutely valid email address (according to the RFCs)) "me\"myself"@domain.com "me\\myelf"@domain.com me.myself@[12.34.56.78] me.myself@[IPv6:::12.34.56.78] me+...@do... me/hom...@do... !me!home%th...@do... "John \"Doe\" Junior"@domain.com me*ho...@do... +3~3+...@do... {_iamcool_}@domain.com etc... I am probably pulling hairs here with the above examples. Probably most users will never use the possibilities offered by the RFCs? Anyway... I just wanted to include the most obvious characters for the local part when stripping email addresses in Virtual Vacation. If it is really needed then I happy to extend the regexp/code to include more valid emails. But one needs first to check if Email::Valid is able to validate them. Kind Regards Stevan Bajic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-10 21:15 Message: Thanks for the bug report; we believe this has been fixed in subversion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-10 21:14 Message: Hi, changes merged; testing feedback welcome... I'm not using the vacation.pl script in production so don't really get to test it. David ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Stevan Bajic (sbajic) Date: 2009-07-10 12:44 Message: Hello gingerdog Anything else you want me to include into Virtual Vacation? Kind Regards from Switzerland Stevan Bajic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-09 19:59 Message: "Hi, Patch much appreciated; will merge when I get time... hopefully before the end of the weekend. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818228&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-10 21:14:46
|
Bugs item #2818228, was opened at 2009-07-07 21:18 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gingerdog You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818228&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stevan Bajic (sbajic) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Virtual Vacation and alias lookups don't work as expected Initial Comment: The current implementation in Virtual Vacation is from my viewpoint not taking full advantage of Postfix.Admin. Assuming the following scenario: domain: bajic.ch mailbox user: st...@ba... aliases for mailbox user: @bajic.ch -> st...@ba..., st...@ba... -> st...@ba... Now if I go and enable Virtual Vacation in Postfix.Admin a sender sending a mail to wha...@ba... will not get a vacation message. In the log I would see something like that (Postfix log): ----- Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Script argument SMTP recipient is : 'stevan#baj...@au...' and smtp_sender : 're...@do...' Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Converted autoreply mailbox back to normal style - from stevan#baj...@au... to st...@ba... Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Email headers have to: 'wha...@ba...' and From: '"Just some user" <re...@do...>' Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - smtp envelope recipient st...@ba... not found in the header recipients (wha...@ba... & ) (therefore they were bcc'ed, so won't send vacation message) Jul 7 20:54:06 theia postfix/pipe[15257]: ADF79823C02: to=<stevan#baj...@au...>, orig_to=<st...@ba...>, relay=vacation, delay=0.57, delays=0.13/0/0/0.43, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via vacation service ----- That debug message is wrong. One reason why it is wrong: BCC: If wha...@ba... would be a BCC recipient then wha...@ba... would automatically be moved to the TO header field on MY server. When I get the message I don't have a BCC header field. The SENDER however should see on his copy (in the send folder) that he BCC'ed me. But I should not see it. So the error message is wrong. The second issue is that it is true that stevan#baj...@au... (autoreply.vunet.local is my vacation domain) does not match wha...@ba... (stevan#baj...@au... => st...@ba... != wha...@ba...) in the headers. BUT how useful is Virtual Vacation if I have to enter for each and every alias I have in Postfix.Admin a new vacation? Beside that I can NOT add it (since I only can login with my real destination address (st...@ba...)) I find it unpractical do add multiple vacation messages for each and every alias. Virtual Vacation should from my viewpoint try harder to resolve an alias. All the information is there and just a bunch of additional lookups are needed to really resolve wha...@ba... to st...@ba... and then see that st...@ba... has a vacation active. On my older Postfix.Admin setup I have extended Virtual Vacation to offer more functionality the the original edition. For my new Postfix.Admin 2.3 installation I am probably not going again to add those features to Postfix.Admin but I need the alias lookup to work right. So I went and checked out the latest SVN today and changed Virtual Vacation to do proper alias lookups. All the things I mentioned above to not work have been fixed in the included Virtual Vacation Perl script. Additionally I did the following things as well: * fixed a bug/typo in the new Mail::Sender call (it's "$sender->SendLineEnc($body);" and not "$sender->SentLineEnc($body);". See the senD instead of senT?) * added lookups for "Alias Domains" * optimized alias lookup SQL clause * added code to deal with the case that a user can have: - mail address: "us...@do..." - alias/goto: "us...@do..., us...@gm..." or "us...@do..., us...@do..., us...@do..." => Virtual Vacation should (the attached one does) send a vacation message if some one would address us...@do... and us...@do... has vacation active * added some more mail headers to be checked (headers produced by common used Anti-Virus and Anti-Spam tools) * changed some comments (especially the one above strip_address) * removed the code responsible for the above (2nd paragraph) mentioned error condition (see the Postfix log above) * CC needs to be stripped as well else a CC recipient "1,2,3" <12...@do...> would wrongly be expanded/split to: * "1 * 2 * 3" <12...@do...> * Changed strip_address() to return RFC 821 style emails to be all in lowercase * Fixed all dash in a regexp to be escaped * Extended regexp in strip_address to match more valid characters: * Added some characters (except the # since it is used for the Virtual Vacation alias) mentioned in RFCs to the regexp => There are still cases not captured by the new regexp. Capturing them would be possible but I don't know how well Email::Valid would validate them? I have not spend time to look inside Email::Valid to see if it validates emails the right way. If some one has time then try to validate the following emails with Email::Valid: "me\@home"@domain.com "me@home"@domain.com you(firstname).there(lastname)@domain(secondlevel).com(topelevel) -> (everything in parentheses are comments. So the real recipient here would be "you...@do...". I know it's wicked but an absolutely valid email address (according to the RFCs)) "me\"myself"@domain.com "me\\myelf"@domain.com me.myself@[12.34.56.78] me.myself@[IPv6:::12.34.56.78] me+...@do... me/hom...@do... !me!home%th...@do... "John \"Doe\" Junior"@domain.com me*ho...@do... +3~3+...@do... {_iamcool_}@domain.com etc... I am probably pulling hairs here with the above examples. Probably most users will never use the possibilities offered by the RFCs? Anyway... I just wanted to include the most obvious characters for the local part when stripping email addresses in Virtual Vacation. If it is really needed then I happy to extend the regexp/code to include more valid emails. But one needs first to check if Email::Valid is able to validate them. Kind Regards Stevan Bajic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-10 21:14 Message: Hi, changes merged; testing feedback welcome... I'm not using the vacation.pl script in production so don't really get to test it. David ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Stevan Bajic (sbajic) Date: 2009-07-10 12:44 Message: Hello gingerdog Anything else you want me to include into Virtual Vacation? Kind Regards from Switzerland Stevan Bajic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-09 19:59 Message: "Hi, Patch much appreciated; will merge when I get time... hopefully before the end of the weekend. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818228&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-10 12:44:57
|
Bugs item #2818228, was opened at 2009-07-07 23:18 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sbajic You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818228&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stevan Bajic (sbajic) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Virtual Vacation and alias lookups don't work as expected Initial Comment: The current implementation in Virtual Vacation is from my viewpoint not taking full advantage of Postfix.Admin. Assuming the following scenario: domain: bajic.ch mailbox user: st...@ba... aliases for mailbox user: @bajic.ch -> st...@ba..., st...@ba... -> st...@ba... Now if I go and enable Virtual Vacation in Postfix.Admin a sender sending a mail to wha...@ba... will not get a vacation message. In the log I would see something like that (Postfix log): ----- Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Script argument SMTP recipient is : 'stevan#baj...@au...' and smtp_sender : 're...@do...' Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Converted autoreply mailbox back to normal style - from stevan#baj...@au... to st...@ba... Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Email headers have to: 'wha...@ba...' and From: '"Just some user" <re...@do...>' Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - smtp envelope recipient st...@ba... not found in the header recipients (wha...@ba... & ) (therefore they were bcc'ed, so won't send vacation message) Jul 7 20:54:06 theia postfix/pipe[15257]: ADF79823C02: to=<stevan#baj...@au...>, orig_to=<st...@ba...>, relay=vacation, delay=0.57, delays=0.13/0/0/0.43, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via vacation service ----- That debug message is wrong. One reason why it is wrong: BCC: If wha...@ba... would be a BCC recipient then wha...@ba... would automatically be moved to the TO header field on MY server. When I get the message I don't have a BCC header field. The SENDER however should see on his copy (in the send folder) that he BCC'ed me. But I should not see it. So the error message is wrong. The second issue is that it is true that stevan#baj...@au... (autoreply.vunet.local is my vacation domain) does not match wha...@ba... (stevan#baj...@au... => st...@ba... != wha...@ba...) in the headers. BUT how useful is Virtual Vacation if I have to enter for each and every alias I have in Postfix.Admin a new vacation? Beside that I can NOT add it (since I only can login with my real destination address (st...@ba...)) I find it unpractical do add multiple vacation messages for each and every alias. Virtual Vacation should from my viewpoint try harder to resolve an alias. All the information is there and just a bunch of additional lookups are needed to really resolve wha...@ba... to st...@ba... and then see that st...@ba... has a vacation active. On my older Postfix.Admin setup I have extended Virtual Vacation to offer more functionality the the original edition. For my new Postfix.Admin 2.3 installation I am probably not going again to add those features to Postfix.Admin but I need the alias lookup to work right. So I went and checked out the latest SVN today and changed Virtual Vacation to do proper alias lookups. All the things I mentioned above to not work have been fixed in the included Virtual Vacation Perl script. Additionally I did the following things as well: * fixed a bug/typo in the new Mail::Sender call (it's "$sender->SendLineEnc($body);" and not "$sender->SentLineEnc($body);". See the senD instead of senT?) * added lookups for "Alias Domains" * optimized alias lookup SQL clause * added code to deal with the case that a user can have: - mail address: "us...@do..." - alias/goto: "us...@do..., us...@gm..." or "us...@do..., us...@do..., us...@do..." => Virtual Vacation should (the attached one does) send a vacation message if some one would address us...@do... and us...@do... has vacation active * added some more mail headers to be checked (headers produced by common used Anti-Virus and Anti-Spam tools) * changed some comments (especially the one above strip_address) * removed the code responsible for the above (2nd paragraph) mentioned error condition (see the Postfix log above) * CC needs to be stripped as well else a CC recipient "1,2,3" <12...@do...> would wrongly be expanded/split to: * "1 * 2 * 3" <12...@do...> * Changed strip_address() to return RFC 821 style emails to be all in lowercase * Fixed all dash in a regexp to be escaped * Extended regexp in strip_address to match more valid characters: * Added some characters (except the # since it is used for the Virtual Vacation alias) mentioned in RFCs to the regexp => There are still cases not captured by the new regexp. Capturing them would be possible but I don't know how well Email::Valid would validate them? I have not spend time to look inside Email::Valid to see if it validates emails the right way. If some one has time then try to validate the following emails with Email::Valid: "me\@home"@domain.com "me@home"@domain.com you(firstname).there(lastname)@domain(secondlevel).com(topelevel) -> (everything in parentheses are comments. So the real recipient here would be "you...@do...". I know it's wicked but an absolutely valid email address (according to the RFCs)) "me\"myself"@domain.com "me\\myelf"@domain.com me.myself@[12.34.56.78] me.myself@[IPv6:::12.34.56.78] me+...@do... me/hom...@do... !me!home%th...@do... "John \"Doe\" Junior"@domain.com me*ho...@do... +3~3+...@do... {_iamcool_}@domain.com etc... I am probably pulling hairs here with the above examples. Probably most users will never use the possibilities offered by the RFCs? Anyway... I just wanted to include the most obvious characters for the local part when stripping email addresses in Virtual Vacation. If it is really needed then I happy to extend the regexp/code to include more valid emails. But one needs first to check if Email::Valid is able to validate them. Kind Regards Stevan Bajic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Stevan Bajic (sbajic) Date: 2009-07-10 14:44 Message: Hello gingerdog Anything else you want me to include into Virtual Vacation? Kind Regards from Switzerland Stevan Bajic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-09 21:59 Message: "Hi, Patch much appreciated; will merge when I get time... hopefully before the end of the weekend. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818228&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-10 02:54:30
|
Bugs item #2818862, was opened at 2009-07-09 15:27 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by ryowsuzuki You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818862&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: v 2.3 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Ryow (ryowsuzuki) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: php >= 5.3: some functions are deprecated. Initial Comment: I equipped postfixadmin 2.3.5rc with php 5.3 and encountered some errors like this: Deprecated: Function ereg() is deprecated in /home/httpd/vhosts/p-macle.com/postfixadmin/functions.inc.php on line 19 After php5.3, ereg() is deprecated. (I fixed this code with strcmp()). Other deprecated functions are listed at the URL below: http://us2.php.net/manual/en/migration53.deprecated.php Would these future-deprecated functions be replaced to the compatible ones with the old php in the future release? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Ryow (ryowsuzuki) Date: 2009-07-10 11:54 Message: Thank you gingerdog for suggesting me make a patch. This is my first time to make a patch... but I made it anyway and uploaded. I don't know if it works good or not, though I tested it myself and worked fine. Please try it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-10 04:57 Message: Hi, Yes, removing ereg should be no hardship.I'd appreciate a patch if possible :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818862&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-09 19:59:19
|
Bugs item #2818228, was opened at 2009-07-07 21:18 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gingerdog You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818228&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stevan Bajic (sbajic) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Virtual Vacation and alias lookups don't work as expected Initial Comment: The current implementation in Virtual Vacation is from my viewpoint not taking full advantage of Postfix.Admin. Assuming the following scenario: domain: bajic.ch mailbox user: st...@ba... aliases for mailbox user: @bajic.ch -> st...@ba..., st...@ba... -> st...@ba... Now if I go and enable Virtual Vacation in Postfix.Admin a sender sending a mail to wha...@ba... will not get a vacation message. In the log I would see something like that (Postfix log): ----- Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Script argument SMTP recipient is : 'stevan#baj...@au...' and smtp_sender : 're...@do...' Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Converted autoreply mailbox back to normal style - from stevan#baj...@au... to st...@ba... Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Email headers have to: 'wha...@ba...' and From: '"Just some user" <re...@do...>' Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - smtp envelope recipient st...@ba... not found in the header recipients (wha...@ba... & ) (therefore they were bcc'ed, so won't send vacation message) Jul 7 20:54:06 theia postfix/pipe[15257]: ADF79823C02: to=<stevan#baj...@au...>, orig_to=<st...@ba...>, relay=vacation, delay=0.57, delays=0.13/0/0/0.43, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via vacation service ----- That debug message is wrong. One reason why it is wrong: BCC: If wha...@ba... would be a BCC recipient then wha...@ba... would automatically be moved to the TO header field on MY server. When I get the message I don't have a BCC header field. The SENDER however should see on his copy (in the send folder) that he BCC'ed me. But I should not see it. So the error message is wrong. The second issue is that it is true that stevan#baj...@au... (autoreply.vunet.local is my vacation domain) does not match wha...@ba... (stevan#baj...@au... => st...@ba... != wha...@ba...) in the headers. BUT how useful is Virtual Vacation if I have to enter for each and every alias I have in Postfix.Admin a new vacation? Beside that I can NOT add it (since I only can login with my real destination address (st...@ba...)) I find it unpractical do add multiple vacation messages for each and every alias. Virtual Vacation should from my viewpoint try harder to resolve an alias. All the information is there and just a bunch of additional lookups are needed to really resolve wha...@ba... to st...@ba... and then see that st...@ba... has a vacation active. On my older Postfix.Admin setup I have extended Virtual Vacation to offer more functionality the the original edition. For my new Postfix.Admin 2.3 installation I am probably not going again to add those features to Postfix.Admin but I need the alias lookup to work right. So I went and checked out the latest SVN today and changed Virtual Vacation to do proper alias lookups. All the things I mentioned above to not work have been fixed in the included Virtual Vacation Perl script. Additionally I did the following things as well: * fixed a bug/typo in the new Mail::Sender call (it's "$sender->SendLineEnc($body);" and not "$sender->SentLineEnc($body);". See the senD instead of senT?) * added lookups for "Alias Domains" * optimized alias lookup SQL clause * added code to deal with the case that a user can have: - mail address: "us...@do..." - alias/goto: "us...@do..., us...@gm..." or "us...@do..., us...@do..., us...@do..." => Virtual Vacation should (the attached one does) send a vacation message if some one would address us...@do... and us...@do... has vacation active * added some more mail headers to be checked (headers produced by common used Anti-Virus and Anti-Spam tools) * changed some comments (especially the one above strip_address) * removed the code responsible for the above (2nd paragraph) mentioned error condition (see the Postfix log above) * CC needs to be stripped as well else a CC recipient "1,2,3" <12...@do...> would wrongly be expanded/split to: * "1 * 2 * 3" <12...@do...> * Changed strip_address() to return RFC 821 style emails to be all in lowercase * Fixed all dash in a regexp to be escaped * Extended regexp in strip_address to match more valid characters: * Added some characters (except the # since it is used for the Virtual Vacation alias) mentioned in RFCs to the regexp => There are still cases not captured by the new regexp. Capturing them would be possible but I don't know how well Email::Valid would validate them? I have not spend time to look inside Email::Valid to see if it validates emails the right way. If some one has time then try to validate the following emails with Email::Valid: "me\@home"@domain.com "me@home"@domain.com you(firstname).there(lastname)@domain(secondlevel).com(topelevel) -> (everything in parentheses are comments. So the real recipient here would be "you...@do...". I know it's wicked but an absolutely valid email address (according to the RFCs)) "me\"myself"@domain.com "me\\myelf"@domain.com me.myself@[12.34.56.78] me.myself@[IPv6:::12.34.56.78] me+...@do... me/hom...@do... !me!home%th...@do... "John \"Doe\" Junior"@domain.com me*ho...@do... +3~3+...@do... {_iamcool_}@domain.com etc... I am probably pulling hairs here with the above examples. Probably most users will never use the possibilities offered by the RFCs? Anyway... I just wanted to include the most obvious characters for the local part when stripping email addresses in Virtual Vacation. If it is really needed then I happy to extend the regexp/code to include more valid emails. But one needs first to check if Email::Valid is able to validate them. Kind Regards Stevan Bajic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-09 19:59 Message: "Hi, Patch much appreciated; will merge when I get time... hopefully before the end of the weekend. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818228&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-09 19:58:02
|
Bugs item #2818862, was opened at 2009-07-09 06:27 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gingerdog You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818862&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: v 2.3 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Ryow (ryowsuzuki) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: php >= 5.3: some functions are deprecated. Initial Comment: I equipped postfixadmin 2.3.5rc with php 5.3 and encountered some errors like this: Deprecated: Function ereg() is deprecated in /home/httpd/vhosts/p-macle.com/postfixadmin/functions.inc.php on line 19 After php5.3, ereg() is deprecated. (I fixed this code with strcmp()). Other deprecated functions are listed at the URL below: http://us2.php.net/manual/en/migration53.deprecated.php Would these future-deprecated functions be replaced to the compatible ones with the old php in the future release? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-09 19:57 Message: Hi, Yes, removing ereg should be no hardship.I'd appreciate a patch if possible :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818862&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-09 06:28:02
|
Bugs item #2818862, was opened at 2009-07-09 15:27 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by ryowsuzuki You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818862&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: v 2.3 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Ryow (ryowsuzuki) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: php >= 5.3: some functions are deprecated. Initial Comment: I equipped postfixadmin 2.3.5rc with php 5.3 and encountered some errors like this: Deprecated: Function ereg() is deprecated in /home/httpd/vhosts/p-macle.com/postfixadmin/functions.inc.php on line 19 After php5.3, ereg() is deprecated. (I fixed this code with strcmp()). Other deprecated functions are listed at the URL below: http://us2.php.net/manual/en/migration53.deprecated.php Would these future-deprecated functions be replaced to the compatible ones with the old php in the future release? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818862&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-08 18:11:50
|
Patches item #2818660, was opened at 2009-07-08 22:11 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by terrainc You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937966&aid=2818660&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Dmitry MiksIr (terrainc) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Different encrypt scheme for admins passwords Initial Comment: You can need use plaintext password for mailboxes (for support different auth schemes on client), but still wanna use crypt for admins password. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937966&aid=2818660&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-07 21:18:46
|
Bugs item #2818228, was opened at 2009-07-07 23:18 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by sbajic You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818228&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stevan Bajic (sbajic) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Virtual Vacation and alias lookups don't work as expected Initial Comment: The current implementation in Virtual Vacation is from my viewpoint not taking full advantage of Postfix.Admin. Assuming the following scenario: domain: bajic.ch mailbox user: st...@ba... aliases for mailbox user: @bajic.ch -> st...@ba..., st...@ba... -> st...@ba... Now if I go and enable Virtual Vacation in Postfix.Admin a sender sending a mail to wha...@ba... will not get a vacation message. In the log I would see something like that (Postfix log): ----- Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Script argument SMTP recipient is : 'stevan#baj...@au...' and smtp_sender : 're...@do...' Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Converted autoreply mailbox back to normal style - from stevan#baj...@au... to st...@ba... Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - Email headers have to: 'wha...@ba...' and From: '"Just some user" <re...@do...>' Jul 7 20:54:06 theia /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl: DEBUG - smtp envelope recipient st...@ba... not found in the header recipients (wha...@ba... & ) (therefore they were bcc'ed, so won't send vacation message) Jul 7 20:54:06 theia postfix/pipe[15257]: ADF79823C02: to=<stevan#baj...@au...>, orig_to=<st...@ba...>, relay=vacation, delay=0.57, delays=0.13/0/0/0.43, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via vacation service ----- That debug message is wrong. One reason why it is wrong: BCC: If wha...@ba... would be a BCC recipient then wha...@ba... would automatically be moved to the TO header field on MY server. When I get the message I don't have a BCC header field. The SENDER however should see on his copy (in the send folder) that he BCC'ed me. But I should not see it. So the error message is wrong. The second issue is that it is true that stevan#baj...@au... (autoreply.vunet.local is my vacation domain) does not match wha...@ba... (stevan#baj...@au... => st...@ba... != wha...@ba...) in the headers. BUT how useful is Virtual Vacation if I have to enter for each and every alias I have in Postfix.Admin a new vacation? Beside that I can NOT add it (since I only can login with my real destination address (st...@ba...)) I find it unpractical do add multiple vacation messages for each and every alias. Virtual Vacation should from my viewpoint try harder to resolve an alias. All the information is there and just a bunch of additional lookups are needed to really resolve wha...@ba... to st...@ba... and then see that st...@ba... has a vacation active. On my older Postfix.Admin setup I have extended Virtual Vacation to offer more functionality the the original edition. For my new Postfix.Admin 2.3 installation I am probably not going again to add those features to Postfix.Admin but I need the alias lookup to work right. So I went and checked out the latest SVN today and changed Virtual Vacation to do proper alias lookups. All the things I mentioned above to not work have been fixed in the included Virtual Vacation Perl script. Additionally I did the following things as well: * fixed a bug/typo in the new Mail::Sender call (it's "$sender->SendLineEnc($body);" and not "$sender->SentLineEnc($body);". See the senD instead of senT?) * added lookups for "Alias Domains" * optimized alias lookup SQL clause * added code to deal with the case that a user can have: - mail address: "us...@do..." - alias/goto: "us...@do..., us...@gm..." or "us...@do..., us...@do..., us...@do..." => Virtual Vacation should (the attached one does) send a vacation message if some one would address us...@do... and us...@do... has vacation active * added some more mail headers to be checked (headers produced by common used Anti-Virus and Anti-Spam tools) * changed some comments (especially the one above strip_address) * removed the code responsible for the above (2nd paragraph) mentioned error condition (see the Postfix log above) * CC needs to be stripped as well else a CC recipient "1,2,3" <12...@do...> would wrongly be expanded/split to: * "1 * 2 * 3" <12...@do...> * Changed strip_address() to return RFC 821 style emails to be all in lowercase * Fixed all dash in a regexp to be escaped * Extended regexp in strip_address to match more valid characters: * Added some characters (except the # since it is used for the Virtual Vacation alias) mentioned in RFCs to the regexp => There are still cases not captured by the new regexp. Capturing them would be possible but I don't know how well Email::Valid would validate them? I have not spend time to look inside Email::Valid to see if it validates emails the right way. If some one has time then try to validate the following emails with Email::Valid: "me\@home"@domain.com "me@home"@domain.com you(firstname).there(lastname)@domain(secondlevel).com(topelevel) -> (everything in parentheses are comments. So the real recipient here would be "you...@do...". I know it's wicked but an absolutely valid email address (according to the RFCs)) "me\"myself"@domain.com "me\\myelf"@domain.com me.myself@[12.34.56.78] me.myself@[IPv6:::12.34.56.78] me+...@do... me/hom...@do... !me!home%th...@do... "John \"Doe\" Junior"@domain.com me*ho...@do... +3~3+...@do... {_iamcool_}@domain.com etc... I am probably pulling hairs here with the above examples. Probably most users will never use the possibilities offered by the RFCs? Anyway... I just wanted to include the most obvious characters for the local part when stripping email addresses in Virtual Vacation. If it is really needed then I happy to extend the regexp/code to include more valid emails. But one needs first to check if Email::Valid is able to validate them. Kind Regards Stevan Bajic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2818228&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-02 08:17:33
|
Patches item #2721439, was opened at 2009-03-29 23:07 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gingerdog You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937966&aid=2721439&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: use vacation.pl for multiple choice of reply Initial Comment: adding choice of reply -type of reply is store in table vacation in new record type -delay between reply is store in table vacation in new record delay choice of reply -once -autoreply - interval reply Choice can be set by admin or user ( only by pfa not by squirrelmail) option is controle by config.inc.php ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-07-02 08:17 Message: "patch -p0 whatever.diff " should be all you need. Sometimes you need to strip the leading directories off the file paths, if this is the case you might need e.g. patch -p1 or something. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-07-01 21:56 Message: hi Guys if i want to use the diff file on a other system how do i use it (because i want to test is on two other live systems). and will it also change the config file Regards Jan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-20 17:34 Message: Hi Guys, Oops ! There was a bug in the pfa-diff-090419 file. hereby a new pathfle pfa-diff-090420 Jan Kruis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-19 23:30 Message: Hi David, I have uploaded two files - pfa-diff-090419.php - postfix_mysql_dump the first file is the patch file the seconfd file is mine database postfixadmin (mysql style) BTW saw you note to late about $Id please also check my engilsh if you could regardes Jan Kruis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Christian Boltz (christian_boltz) Date: 2009-04-18 22:10 Message: For the database changes, you have two options: a) perfect: add an upgrade function to upgrade.php that does the needed ALTER TABLE queries (upgrade.php has enough examples ;-) (you can use any function number you want - I'll set it to the correct value on commit) b) easy: describe what database changes are needed, for example: # additional fields for vacation table: # `vacation_interval` int(10) NOT NULL default '0', You can take these lines from a sql dump. GingerDog or I can then write the needed function in upgrade.php. If you add fields containing text, please choose the charset carefully: - latin1 (aka iso-8859-1) if the field is guaranteed to contain ascii chars only (like mail adresses) - utf-8 if the field can contain any text (like user comments, vacation message etc.) BTW: please don't modify the lines containing $Id manually. They are automatically maintained by svn. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-18 07:34 Message: Hi David Thx for the info. But how abaut the records i add to the table in the database Jan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-04-18 07:04 Message: Hi Jan, Yes - you can edit diff/patch files - just try and make sure it remains valid. Your diff file _should_ contain the new files as well - if it doesn't, try doing 'svn add file.php' and try and re-create the diff then. Thanks for the hard work :) David. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-18 00:06 Message: Hi guys, I think it ready. I will test it for two more days. A question. I have given the command svn diff > diff_file to generate a path file but can I edit this file, to leave out my config.inc.php stuff out. and who must i send the new 2 php to your which i added to this project. (just a patchs) which are edit-userscontrol-domain.php and templates/vacation.php also what kind of file do you need for de modifaction in the database table. my svn version is 629 at this moment. Regrads Jan Kruis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-13 19:33 Message: I will try to implement this request ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Charles (libertytrek) Date: 2009-04-13 11:03 Message: > Making the reply-interval configurable per user is a good feature and will > be merged after the 2.3 release. Will there be an Admin option to disallow Users from setting/changing this interval if desired? Many sites (mine for one) will want to set this policy site-wide... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Christian Boltz (christian_boltz) Date: 2009-04-13 10:08 Message: I only had a very quick look on your changes. Some notes: Making the reply-interval configurable per user is a good feature and will be merged after the 2.3 release. Merging the vacation template for users and admins into one file is also a good idea. Vacation start and stop date is indeed a different feature. I'd say it should be implemented after merging your changes (to avoid merge conflicts). We once used *.tpl for the template files and switched to *.php to make the PHP code inaccessible from the outside. (*.tpl can usually be downloaded as plain text.) Finally a question: Which version (or SVN revision) of postfixadmin did you use as base for your changes? Knowing this would make merging easier - however if you don't remember, I can reconstruct it from the $Id lines in the files. (It would be even better if you can provide a patch instead of the changed files. If you did your changes against a SVN checkout, just run "svn diff".) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-07 20:08 Message: hi, I have a question ? Because in your earlier replay you have told I'll see if I can find the discussion(s), and create a formal enhancement request to track it. What happens with this modification ? Will it be used or ... ? These are actually two modifications: modification 1 To reduce the two templates for setting the vacation edit-vacation.php and user-vacation.php to only one vacation.php which checks from which module ( admin or user) it is called. Because the two older templates did use a lot of same code. modification 2 Adding the option to make a choice of reply. If the choice is once it act as vacation normale should work. If the choice is autoreply there is a value in config.inc.php which set the delay time between two emails from one sender to prevent the vacation.pl from replaying from a possible autoreplay email. The admin as well as the user can make the choice of replay. Depending on the settings in the config file. in the table vacation i add two records type and delay and in the table vacation-notification i add the record notified_at. In the config.inc.php file you can set these options allow or not the multiple-choice or reply allow or not the multiple-choice or reply for users ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-03-30 21:50 Message: Hi Guys, Hmmm... I'm confused too I know I recall discussion a while back about some new functionality, that would not only allow the user to set the frequency, but would allow the Admin from PREVENTING users from doing this, if the Site had a certain policy they wanted to enforce site-wide. ===> See function vacation & use of config.inc.php Did this get lost? Also, I think in the same discussion, we talked about the possibility of setting Start/Stop dates, so you could actually schedule your vacation message ahead of time and have it auto-start/end at the desired times. what has this to do with this patch the vacation.php template file can by used by edit-vacation and user-vacation so only have to modifed one file. In the config.inc.php file i added some value which give contole over vacation.php if a user can change type of replay and the time delay. Regards Jan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Charles (libertytrek) Date: 2009-03-30 14:14 Message: Ok, thanks, good to know I'm not going senile! ;) I'll see if I can find the discussion(s), and create a formal enhancement request to track it. Thanks! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-03-30 12:32 Message: libertytrek - yes, I vaguely remember such conversations; I'm happy to merge such features once 2.3 is out. (Speaking of which it's probably time for another rc release) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Charles (libertytrek) Date: 2009-03-30 10:43 Message: Hmmm... I'm confused. I know I recall discussion a while back about some new functionality, that would not only allow the user to set the frequency, but would allow the Admin from PREVENTING users from doing this, if the Site had a certain policy they wanted to enforce site-wide. Did this get lost? Also, I think in the same discussion, we talked about the possibility of setting Start/Stop dates, so you could actually schedule your vacation message ahead of time and have it auto-start/end at the desired times. Or am I just crazy? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-03-29 23:19 Message: edit-vacation.php and user/vacation.php use the new template/vacation.php BTW is it a idea to change the extensie to tpl for the template file ( we noe have two vacation.php file ??) regrades Jan Kruis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937966&aid=2721439&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-07-01 21:56:59
|
Patches item #2721439, was opened at 2009-03-30 01:07 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by jan-kruis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937966&aid=2721439&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: use vacation.pl for multiple choice of reply Initial Comment: adding choice of reply -type of reply is store in table vacation in new record type -delay between reply is store in table vacation in new record delay choice of reply -once -autoreply - interval reply Choice can be set by admin or user ( only by pfa not by squirrelmail) option is controle by config.inc.php ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-07-01 23:56 Message: hi Guys if i want to use the diff file on a other system how do i use it (because i want to test is on two other live systems). and will it also change the config file Regards Jan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-20 19:34 Message: Hi Guys, Oops ! There was a bug in the pfa-diff-090419 file. hereby a new pathfle pfa-diff-090420 Jan Kruis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-20 01:30 Message: Hi David, I have uploaded two files - pfa-diff-090419.php - postfix_mysql_dump the first file is the patch file the seconfd file is mine database postfixadmin (mysql style) BTW saw you note to late about $Id please also check my engilsh if you could regardes Jan Kruis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Christian Boltz (christian_boltz) Date: 2009-04-19 00:10 Message: For the database changes, you have two options: a) perfect: add an upgrade function to upgrade.php that does the needed ALTER TABLE queries (upgrade.php has enough examples ;-) (you can use any function number you want - I'll set it to the correct value on commit) b) easy: describe what database changes are needed, for example: # additional fields for vacation table: # `vacation_interval` int(10) NOT NULL default '0', You can take these lines from a sql dump. GingerDog or I can then write the needed function in upgrade.php. If you add fields containing text, please choose the charset carefully: - latin1 (aka iso-8859-1) if the field is guaranteed to contain ascii chars only (like mail adresses) - utf-8 if the field can contain any text (like user comments, vacation message etc.) BTW: please don't modify the lines containing $Id manually. They are automatically maintained by svn. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-18 09:34 Message: Hi David Thx for the info. But how abaut the records i add to the table in the database Jan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-04-18 09:04 Message: Hi Jan, Yes - you can edit diff/patch files - just try and make sure it remains valid. Your diff file _should_ contain the new files as well - if it doesn't, try doing 'svn add file.php' and try and re-create the diff then. Thanks for the hard work :) David. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-18 02:06 Message: Hi guys, I think it ready. I will test it for two more days. A question. I have given the command svn diff > diff_file to generate a path file but can I edit this file, to leave out my config.inc.php stuff out. and who must i send the new 2 php to your which i added to this project. (just a patchs) which are edit-userscontrol-domain.php and templates/vacation.php also what kind of file do you need for de modifaction in the database table. my svn version is 629 at this moment. Regrads Jan Kruis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-13 21:33 Message: I will try to implement this request ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Charles (libertytrek) Date: 2009-04-13 13:03 Message: > Making the reply-interval configurable per user is a good feature and will > be merged after the 2.3 release. Will there be an Admin option to disallow Users from setting/changing this interval if desired? Many sites (mine for one) will want to set this policy site-wide... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Christian Boltz (christian_boltz) Date: 2009-04-13 12:08 Message: I only had a very quick look on your changes. Some notes: Making the reply-interval configurable per user is a good feature and will be merged after the 2.3 release. Merging the vacation template for users and admins into one file is also a good idea. Vacation start and stop date is indeed a different feature. I'd say it should be implemented after merging your changes (to avoid merge conflicts). We once used *.tpl for the template files and switched to *.php to make the PHP code inaccessible from the outside. (*.tpl can usually be downloaded as plain text.) Finally a question: Which version (or SVN revision) of postfixadmin did you use as base for your changes? Knowing this would make merging easier - however if you don't remember, I can reconstruct it from the $Id lines in the files. (It would be even better if you can provide a patch instead of the changed files. If you did your changes against a SVN checkout, just run "svn diff".) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-04-07 22:08 Message: hi, I have a question ? Because in your earlier replay you have told I'll see if I can find the discussion(s), and create a formal enhancement request to track it. What happens with this modification ? Will it be used or ... ? These are actually two modifications: modification 1 To reduce the two templates for setting the vacation edit-vacation.php and user-vacation.php to only one vacation.php which checks from which module ( admin or user) it is called. Because the two older templates did use a lot of same code. modification 2 Adding the option to make a choice of reply. If the choice is once it act as vacation normale should work. If the choice is autoreply there is a value in config.inc.php which set the delay time between two emails from one sender to prevent the vacation.pl from replaying from a possible autoreplay email. The admin as well as the user can make the choice of replay. Depending on the settings in the config file. in the table vacation i add two records type and delay and in the table vacation-notification i add the record notified_at. In the config.inc.php file you can set these options allow or not the multiple-choice or reply allow or not the multiple-choice or reply for users ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-03-30 23:50 Message: Hi Guys, Hmmm... I'm confused too I know I recall discussion a while back about some new functionality, that would not only allow the user to set the frequency, but would allow the Admin from PREVENTING users from doing this, if the Site had a certain policy they wanted to enforce site-wide. ===> See function vacation & use of config.inc.php Did this get lost? Also, I think in the same discussion, we talked about the possibility of setting Start/Stop dates, so you could actually schedule your vacation message ahead of time and have it auto-start/end at the desired times. what has this to do with this patch the vacation.php template file can by used by edit-vacation and user-vacation so only have to modifed one file. In the config.inc.php file i added some value which give contole over vacation.php if a user can change type of replay and the time delay. Regards Jan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Charles (libertytrek) Date: 2009-03-30 16:14 Message: Ok, thanks, good to know I'm not going senile! ;) I'll see if I can find the discussion(s), and create a formal enhancement request to track it. Thanks! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-03-30 14:32 Message: libertytrek - yes, I vaguely remember such conversations; I'm happy to merge such features once 2.3 is out. (Speaking of which it's probably time for another rc release) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Charles (libertytrek) Date: 2009-03-30 12:43 Message: Hmmm... I'm confused. I know I recall discussion a while back about some new functionality, that would not only allow the user to set the frequency, but would allow the Admin from PREVENTING users from doing this, if the Site had a certain policy they wanted to enforce site-wide. Did this get lost? Also, I think in the same discussion, we talked about the possibility of setting Start/Stop dates, so you could actually schedule your vacation message ahead of time and have it auto-start/end at the desired times. Or am I just crazy? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jan Kruis (jan-kruis) Date: 2009-03-30 01:19 Message: edit-vacation.php and user/vacation.php use the new template/vacation.php BTW is it a idea to change the extensie to tpl for the template file ( we noe have two vacation.php file ??) regrades Jan Kruis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937966&aid=2721439&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-06-30 21:20:27
|
Bugs item #2814820, was opened at 2009-06-30 22:18 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nls You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2814820&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: v 2.3 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: nls (nls) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: crypt() is not used according to specs Initial Comment: In functions.inc.php, pacrypt() uses the php crypt() function the wrong way when processing MD5 hashes. For the salt, all 12 characters of the input password hash salt must be used, including the magic sequence and the closing dollar sign, for example: "$1$abcdefgh$". Otherwise the crypt() function generates the shorter DES password hashes and password comparison always fails. This problem has become apparent for me when I was trying to migrate a user db for postfixadmin, where user password hashes are stored as DES for some users, and as MD5 for others. pacrypt() would be able to handle both, but currently it doesn't because of the forementioned mistake. Simply using $salt = "\$1\$${split_salt[2]}\$"; solves the problem. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: nls (nls) Date: 2009-06-30 23:20 Message: And one thing i forgot, related to this problem: the ereg expression is written as ereg ("\$1\$", $pw_db), and that is wrong. Instead it should be written as ereg ("\\$1\\$", $pw_db)), with double backslashes. Otherwise the if () will never evaluate true when an MD5 hash is passed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2814820&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-06-30 20:18:47
|
Bugs item #2814820, was opened at 2009-06-30 22:18 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by nls You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2814820&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Core Group: v 2.3 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: nls (nls) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: crypt() is not used according to specs Initial Comment: In functions.inc.php, pacrypt() uses the php crypt() function the wrong way when processing MD5 hashes. For the salt, all 12 characters of the input password hash salt must be used, including the magic sequence and the closing dollar sign, for example: "$1$abcdefgh$". Otherwise the crypt() function generates the shorter DES password hashes and password comparison always fails. This problem has become apparent for me when I was trying to migrate a user db for postfixadmin, where user password hashes are stored as DES for some users, and as MD5 for others. pacrypt() would be able to handle both, but currently it doesn't because of the forementioned mistake. Simply using $salt = "\$1\$${split_salt[2]}\$"; solves the problem. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=2814820&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-06-29 16:33:07
|
Feature Requests item #2813224, was opened at 2009-06-27 08:49 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by libertytrek You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937967&aid=2813224&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Charles (libertytrek) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: End user customization of header strings Initial Comment: Hi all, I've been meaning to post this FR for a while... How hard would it be to provide the ability to configure the header strings that the vacation.pl script uses to determine when NOT to send a vacation auto-response? For example, in ASSP (also a perl script), in the GUI interface, it has options that have a textbox that can take either a reference to a file - ie, file:filename, where each line in the file would be a different string, or just a comma separated list of strings... (see attached for an example of how this looks in the ASSP GUI) This way, non-programmers like myself would have the ability to adjust these values, and add to (or subtract from) them, without having to resort to trying to edit the actual vacation.pl script. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Charles (libertytrek) Date: 2009-06-29 08:59 Message: Me neither... ;) thats why I included the link to the assp projects example gui page... I was hoping someone could use the assp.pl script as an example of how to do it... ASSP project download page is: https://sourceforge.net/projects/assp/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-06-29 04:02 Message: it's probably not difficult to do, although i'm not sure I know a good way to do it in perl.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937967&aid=2813224&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-06-29 08:32:28
|
Feature Requests item #2813178, was opened at 2009-06-27 09:46 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gingerdog You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937967&aid=2813178&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stevan Bajic (sbajic) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: More flexible vacation module regarding mailsever definition Initial Comment: The currently used Mail::sendmail module is very limited regarding the configuration of SMTP server data. You can't define: - SMTP port - SMTP username - SMTP password - SMTP authentication I am using Postfix as my MTA and using virtual vacation is a no-go for me since I do sender mismatch checking and with the currently used Mail::sendmail in virtual vacation I can use virtual vacation on my setup. I would like to replace the Mail::sendmail module with Mail::Sender which is offering much more flexibility then Mail::sendmail. Should I send a patch to virtual vacation v4 using Mail::Sender for sending mails? Is the above mentioned functionality useful for other people? How high are the chances to get such a patch merged into Postfix.Admin? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-06-29 08:32 Message: merged into trunk; ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Charles (libertytrek) Date: 2009-06-27 12:41 Message: Can't you just override the sender_mismatch restriction for the vacation service? Or maybe you can't do that with pipes? Anyway, this sounds good... thanks for the contrib, Steve! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-06-27 11:31 Message: Cool. Thanks for the quick reply. I'm no perl pro, so I'm sure much could be improved. I hadn't heard of mail::sender before either. Keep the patches coming, will try and read/merge this evening ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Stevan Bajic (sbajic) Date: 2009-06-27 11:04 Message: Hallo David Here a very quick shot of a patch. From my viewpoint many things could be made better. The whole enconding part could be made less depended on external modules since Mail::Sender has them built in. I will anyway post the patch but work later on it to make it more flexible. Kind Regards from Switzerland Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-06-27 10:51 Message: Hi, yes I'm more than happy to see a patch, and would almost certainly merge it thanks David ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937967&aid=2813178&group_id=191583 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2009-06-29 08:02:03
|
Feature Requests item #2813224, was opened at 2009-06-27 12:49 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gingerdog You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937967&aid=2813224&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Vacation Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Charles (libertytrek) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: End user customization of header strings Initial Comment: Hi all, I've been meaning to post this FR for a while... How hard would it be to provide the ability to configure the header strings that the vacation.pl script uses to determine when NOT to send a vacation auto-response? For example, in ASSP (also a perl script), in the GUI interface, it has options that have a textbox that can take either a reference to a file - ie, file:filename, where each line in the file would be a different string, or just a comma separated list of strings... (see attached for an example of how this looks in the ASSP GUI) This way, non-programmers like myself would have the ability to adjust these values, and add to (or subtract from) them, without having to resort to trying to edit the actual vacation.pl script. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: GingerDog (gingerdog) Date: 2009-06-29 08:02 Message: it's probably not difficult to do, although i'm not sure I know a good way to do it in perl.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937967&aid=2813224&group_id=191583 |
700 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
