Menu
▾
▴
webadmin-list
|
From: Richard C. <rch...@aa...> - 2009-12-24 09:09:08
|
Hi again Jamie
I have done a little research here - and it appears to me that mailq is
a sendmail specific (or at least sendmail centric) command. Maybe it can
be made to work with postfix - but I haven't figured out how.
Postfix offers an equivalent command:
*> postqueue -p*
-Queue ID- --Size-- ----Arrival Time---- -Sender/Recipient-------
260EA34E0002 522 Thu Dec 24 16:55:41 rch...@aa...
(connect to working-life.net.au[208.67.219.132]: Connection timed out)
aa...@wo...
-- 1 Kbytes in 1 Request.
----------------------------------
Should the webmin postfix module be changed - or a configuration option
be added to allow the use of this command? Or maybe there is a better
way.....
Richard.
From: "Jamie Cameron" <jca...@we... <mailto:jca...@we...>>
To: Webmin users list <web...@li...
<mailto:web...@li...>>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:16:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [webmin-l] Suggestion - Postfix deferred mail queue visibility
Is there perhaps a command-line flag to the mailq command that shows
the contents of the deferred queue?
- Jamie
On 17/Dec/2009 16:26 Richard Chapman <rch...@aa...
<mailto:rch...@aa...>> wrote ..
> *> mailq*
> /var/spool/mqueue is empty
>
> Total requests: 0
>
>
> So that explains what webmin sees... but I am pretty sure there is stuff
> in the deferred queue... I have had a delayed mail message yesterday -
> and I'm pretty sure it will expire in a few days... by past experience.
> Also - here is what I see in the posfix queue folders:
>
> I think this is the deferred email:
> [root@C5 C]# pwd
> /var/spool/postfix/deferred/C
> [root@C5 C]# ls -l
> total 8
> -rwx------ 1 postfix postfix 1349 Dec 18 2009 CEAD81D220B4
> [root@C5 C]#
>
> Maybe my mailq command is pointing to the wrong place (sendmail versus
> postfix perhaps)... Does that make any sense - and do you know why it
> might be so - and how is can be fixed?
>
> Thanks Jamie
>
> Richard.
>
>
>
> Jamie Cameron wrote:
> > On 16/Dec/2009 17:53 Richard Chapman <rch...@aa...
<mailto:rch...@aa...>> wrote ..
> >
> >> I notice that when I have deferred (delayed) mail in the postfix
queue -
> >> usually due to an incorrect domain name in the email address -
that the
> >> Postfix Mail Queue Webmin module shows "0 items in the queue".
> >> I guess this means that there is nothing in the active queue - but it
> >> would be useful to see both the active queue and the deferred queue.
> >> Maybe this is visible already in some other way - but if so - I
haven't
> >> found it.
> >>
> >
> > That's odd, Webmin should display everything in the queue .. assuming
> > it is shown by the "mailq" command.
> >
> > What does "mailq" output if you have messages in this deferred queue?
> >
> > - Jamie
|
|
From: Jamie C. <jca...@we...> - 2009-12-24 18:24:45
|
Usually postfix comes with a mailq command as well, which is a wrapper for the real postqueue command. However, if you have both postfix and sendmail installed, the wrong mailq might get used. In that case, I recommend removing sendmail. Richard Chapman <rch...@aa...> wrote: >Hi again Jamie > >I have done a little research here - and it appears to me that mailq is >a sendmail specific (or at least sendmail centric) command. Maybe it can >be made to work with postfix - but I haven't figured out how. > >Postfix offers an equivalent command: > >*> postqueue -p* >-Queue ID- --Size-- ----Arrival Time---- -Sender/Recipient------- >260EA34E0002 522 Thu Dec 24 16:55:41 rch...@aa... > (connect to working-life.net.au[208.67.219.132]: Connection timed out) > aa...@wo... > >-- 1 Kbytes in 1 Request. >---------------------------------- > >Should the webmin postfix module be changed - or a configuration option >be added to allow the use of this command? Or maybe there is a better >way..... > > >Richard. > > > > > > >From: "Jamie Cameron" <jca...@we... <mailto:jca...@we...>> >To: Webmin users list <web...@li... ><mailto:web...@li...>> >Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:16:23 -0800 (PST) >Subject: Re: [webmin-l] Suggestion - Postfix deferred mail queue visibility >Is there perhaps a command-line flag to the mailq command that shows >the contents of the deferred queue? > > - Jamie > >On 17/Dec/2009 16:26 Richard Chapman <rch...@aa... ><mailto:rch...@aa...>> wrote .. > > *> mailq* > > /var/spool/mqueue is empty > > > > Total requests: 0 > > > > > > So that explains what webmin sees... but I am pretty sure there is stuff > > in the deferred queue... I have had a delayed mail message yesterday - > > and I'm pretty sure it will expire in a few days... by past experience. > > Also - here is what I see in the posfix queue folders: > > > > I think this is the deferred email: > > [root@C5 C]# pwd > > /var/spool/postfix/deferred/C > > [root@C5 C]# ls -l > > total 8 > > -rwx------ 1 postfix postfix 1349 Dec 18 2009 CEAD81D220B4 > > [root@C5 C]# > > > > Maybe my mailq command is pointing to the wrong place (sendmail versus > > postfix perhaps)... Does that make any sense - and do you know why it > > might be so - and how is can be fixed? > > > > Thanks Jamie > > > > Richard. > > > > > > > > Jamie Cameron wrote: > > > On 16/Dec/2009 17:53 Richard Chapman <rch...@aa... ><mailto:rch...@aa...>> wrote .. > > > > > >> I notice that when I have deferred (delayed) mail in the postfix >queue - > > >> usually due to an incorrect domain name in the email address - >that the > > >> Postfix Mail Queue Webmin module shows "0 items in the queue". > > >> I guess this means that there is nothing in the active queue - but it > > >> would be useful to see both the active queue and the deferred queue. > > >> Maybe this is visible already in some other way - but if so - I >haven't > > >> found it. > > >> > > > > > > That's odd, Webmin should display everything in the queue .. assuming > > > it is shown by the "mailq" command. > > > > > > What does "mailq" output if you have messages in this deferred queue? > > > > > > - Jamie > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community >Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support >A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy >Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers >http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev >- >Forwarded by the Webmin mailing list at web...@li... >To remove yourself from this list, go to >http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webadmin-list > |
|
From: Richard C. <rch...@aa...> - 2009-12-27 06:43:50
|
Thanks Jamie and Kris You are both correct as usual.... ie - I do have both postfix and sendmail installed - though the sendmail daemon is not running. I don't think I ever intended to have both - but intended to have only postfix. I played with sendmail in an earlier life - and found it pretty hard to drive. I have been assuming that sendmail got installed due to some dependencies - see also my comments below. However - I have been reluctant to remove sendmail - because some applications (including usemin I think) appear to use /usr/lib/sendmail in scripts to send notifications. I note that I still get a few sendmail stats in my daily logwatch. From what you are both suggesting - I assume now that /usr/lib/sendmail may be a "wrapper" which should point to postfix in a postfix only system. Am I on the right track here? If so - will it be safe to remove sendmail using yum or rpm (Cantos 5.4 system)? Will it correctly recreate the various wrappers like /usr/lib/sendmail and mailq? What does Jamie think of Kris's suggestion to display both queues in webmin - or maybe explicitly display the postfix queue in the webmin postfix module? Richard. Jamie Cameron wrote: Usually postfix comes with a mailq command as well, which is a wrapper for the real postqueue command. However, if you have both postfix and sendmail installed, the wrong mailq might get used. In that case, I recommend removing sendmail. |
|
From: Jamie C. <jca...@we...> - 2009-12-27 21:26:43
|
On 26/Dec/2009 22:43 Richard Chapman <rch...@aa...> wrote .. > Thanks Jamie and Kris > > You are both correct as usual.... > ie - I do have both postfix and sendmail installed - though the sendmail > daemon is not running. I don't think I ever intended to have both - but > intended to have only postfix. I played with sendmail in an earlier life > - and found it pretty hard to drive. I have been assuming that sendmail > got installed due to some dependencies - see also my comments below. > > However - I have been reluctant to remove sendmail - because some > applications (including usemin I think) appear to use /usr/lib/sendmail > in scripts to send notifications. I note that I still get a few sendmail > stats in my daily logwatch. > > From what you are both suggesting - I assume now that /usr/lib/sendmail > may be a "wrapper" which should point to postfix in a postfix only > system. Am I on the right track here? > > If so - will it be safe to remove sendmail using yum or rpm (Cantos 5.4 > system)? Will it correctly recreate the various wrappers like > /usr/lib/sendmail and mailq? > > What does Jamie think of Kris's suggestion to display both queues in > webmin - or maybe explicitly display the postfix queue in the webmin > postfix module? My understanding is that on redhat-based systems, commands like sendmail and mailq are just symlinks to the real program that varies depending on the mail server you have installed. So if you remove sendmail, the system should automatically re-point those links to the postfix equivalents. For example, this is how they look on my system running Sendmail : sh-3.2$ ls -l /usr/sbin/sendmail lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 2008-11-17 18:10 /usr/sbin/sendmail -> /etc/alternatives/mta sh-3.2$ ls -l /etc/alternatives/mta lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 2008-11-18 21:52 /etc/alternatives/mta -> /usr/sbin/sendmail.sendmail while on a system with Postfix : [root@webmail:~] ls -l /usr/sbin/sendmail lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 21 Sep 6 2008 /usr/sbin/sendmail -> /etc/alternatives/mta [root@webmail:~] ls -l /etc/alternatives/mta lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 26 Sep 6 2008 /etc/alternatives/mta -> /usr/sbin/sendmail.postfix - Jamie |
|
From: Joe C. <jo...@vi...> - 2009-12-27 23:38:41
|
On 12/27/2009 1:26 PM, Jamie Cameron wrote: > On 26/Dec/2009 22:43 Richard Chapman<rch...@aa...> wrote .. > >> Thanks Jamie and Kris >> >> You are both correct as usual.... >> ie - I do have both postfix and sendmail installed - though the sendmail >> daemon is not running. I don't think I ever intended to have both - but >> intended to have only postfix. I played with sendmail in an earlier life >> - and found it pretty hard to drive. I have been assuming that sendmail >> got installed due to some dependencies - see also my comments below. >> >> However - I have been reluctant to remove sendmail - because some >> applications (including usemin I think) appear to use /usr/lib/sendmail >> in scripts to send notifications. I note that I still get a few sendmail >> stats in my daily logwatch. >> >> From what you are both suggesting - I assume now that /usr/lib/sendmail >> may be a "wrapper" which should point to postfix in a postfix only >> system. Am I on the right track here? >> >> If so - will it be safe to remove sendmail using yum or rpm (Cantos 5.4 >> system)? Will it correctly recreate the various wrappers like >> /usr/lib/sendmail and mailq? >> >> What does Jamie think of Kris's suggestion to display both queues in >> webmin - or maybe explicitly display the postfix queue in the webmin >> postfix module? >> > My understanding is that on redhat-based systems, commands like sendmail > and mailq are just symlinks to the real program that varies depending on the > mail server you have installed. So if you remove sendmail, the system should > automatically re-point those links to the postfix equivalents. > > This is all under the control of the "alternatives" command. You don't need to uninstall anything, though uninstalling does have the side effect of running alternatives and making the links switch. |
|
From: Kris D. <kd...@vi...> - 2009-12-28 15:53:28
|
Joe Cooper wrote: > This is all under the control of the "alternatives" command. You don't > need to uninstall anything, though uninstalling does have the side > effect of running alternatives and making the links switch. This doesn't help the oddball cases where one might want Postfix installed to handle certain cases (or traffic to one (set of) IP(s) on the server) and sendmail to handle everything else, including /usr/lib/sendmail functionality. If you really do want both on the system, you probably don't need Webmin to administer things... but it's handy and being able to view the contents of both sendmail's and Postfix's queues would be useful. -kgd |
|
From: Richard C. <rch...@aa...> - 2009-12-29 08:42:30
|
Thanks Joe I am learning all the time - and while this is not strictly a webmin question - may I prey on your obvious expertise here: I have read the alternatives man pages - and have found a way to switch to manual and set postfix as the "default" MTA using the "alternatives --config mta" command. The webmin postfixc module now correctly displays the postfix queues. However - I can't find a way to change the relative priorities of postfix and sendmail - so if it ever reverts to "auto" modes again - I guess it will also revert to sendmail. Am I right? Is there a way to decrease the sendmail priority? Thanks Richard. Joe Cooper wrote: > <div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed">On > 12/27/2009 1:26 PM, Jamie Cameron wrote: >> On 26/Dec/2009 22:43 Richard Chapman<rch...@aa...> wrote .. >> >>> Thanks Jamie and Kris >>> >>> You are both correct as usual.... >>> ie - I do have both postfix and sendmail installed - though the >>> sendmail >>> daemon is not running. I don't think I ever intended to have both - but >>> intended to have only postfix. I played with sendmail in an earlier >>> life >>> - and found it pretty hard to drive. I have been assuming that sendmail >>> got installed due to some dependencies - see also my comments below. >>> >>> However - I have been reluctant to remove sendmail - because some >>> applications (including usemin I think) appear to use /usr/lib/sendmail >>> in scripts to send notifications. I note that I still get a few >>> sendmail >>> stats in my daily logwatch. >>> >>> From what you are both suggesting - I assume now that >>> /usr/lib/sendmail >>> may be a "wrapper" which should point to postfix in a postfix only >>> system. Am I on the right track here? >>> >>> If so - will it be safe to remove sendmail using yum or rpm (Cantos 5.4 >>> system)? Will it correctly recreate the various wrappers like >>> /usr/lib/sendmail and mailq? >>> >>> What does Jamie think of Kris's suggestion to display both queues in >>> webmin - or maybe explicitly display the postfix queue in the webmin >>> postfix module? >>> >> My understanding is that on redhat-based systems, commands like sendmail >> and mailq are just symlinks to the real program that varies depending >> on the >> mail server you have installed. So if you remove sendmail, the system >> should >> automatically re-point those links to the postfix equivalents. >> >> > This is all under the control of the "alternatives" command. You > don't need to uninstall anything, though uninstalling does have the > side effect of running alternatives and making the links switch. > > > </div> > |
|
From: Kris D. <kd...@vi...> - 2009-12-24 15:02:38
|
Richard Chapman wrote: > I have done a little research here - and it appears to me that mailq is > a sendmail specific (or at least sendmail centric) command. > On 17/Dec/2009 16:26 Richard Chapman <rch...@aa... > <mailto:rch...@aa...>> wrote .. > > *> mailq* > > /var/spool/mqueue is empty > > > > Total requests: 0 I think you've actually got sendmail installed (as well as Postfix), so Webmin is (unknowingly) using the wrong mailq command. Postfix doesn't use /var/spool/mqueue that I know of; it uses /var/spool/postfix. > Maybe it can > be made to work with postfix - but I haven't figured out how. > > Postfix offers an equivalent command: > > *> postqueue -p* > -Queue ID- --Size-- ----Arrival Time---- -Sender/Recipient------- > 260EA34E0002 522 Thu Dec 24 16:55:41 rch...@aa... > (connect to working-life.net.au[208.67.219.132]: Connection timed out) > aa...@wo... > > -- 1 Kbytes in 1 Request. My comments above notwithstanding, this is probably a good idea; in cases where someone might legitimately have both sendmail and Postfix installed, the queue status for *both* can be shown independently. -kgd |
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X