I was wondering if any one knew of an application to do quota editing (on 2.4.x kernels) from the command line the 'quotatool' package under debian only seems to work for the old 2.2.x style quota.user files and not the aquota.user files that 2.4.x uses. Any ideas welcome :) -- James `BR` Ray - PGP Key: http://www.pethippo.co.uk/?page=pgp - Email -> Phone: mobile@pethippo.co.uk (Urgent only)
Hi, RedHat and most UNIX platforms use the following commands:- edquota : to manage quotas. quota : to view quota usage by user or group. quotacheck : to re-calculate and check quota information. quotaon : to enable quotas on a volume quotactl : a lib. hook to manipulate quotas in programs. More information is available usint man quota and looking at the list of associated progarms at the end of the man page. On Sun, 2002-07-07 at 16:08, James Ray wrote:
I was wondering if any one knew of an application to do quota editing (on 2.4.x kernels) from the command line the 'quotatool' package under debian only seems to work for the old 2.2.x style quota.user files and not the aquota.user files that 2.4.x uses.
Any ideas welcome :)
-- James `BR` Ray - PGP Key: http://www.pethippo.co.uk/?page=pgp - Email -> Phone: mobile@pethippo.co.uk (Urgent only) -- Douglas Willis (ddw@nerc-bas.ac.uk) British Antarctic Survey High Cross, Madingley Road Cambridge, CB3 0ET, United Kingdom tel: +44 1223 221400, fax: +44 1223 362616
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 10:04:53AM +0100, Douglas Willis wrote:
On Sun, 2002-07-07 at 16:08, James Ray wrote:
I was wondering if any one knew of an application to do quota editing (on 2.4.x kernels) from the command line the 'quotatool' package under debian only seems to work for the old 2.2.x style quota.user files and not the aquota.user files that 2.4.x uses.
Any ideas welcome :) RedHat and most UNIX platforms use the following commands:-
edquota : to manage quotas.
edquota just spawns an ASCII file, which is hardly command line. There is no way to specifiy command line options such as a soft block of 30000 lets say from what i can see, do you know something diffrent?
quota : to view quota usage by user or group. quotacheck : to re-calculate and check quota information. quotaon : to enable quotas on a volume
quotactl : a lib. hook to manipulate quotas in programs.
More information is available usint man quota and looking at the list of associated progarms at the end of the man page.
-- James `BR` Ray - PGP Key: http://www.pethippo.co.uk/?page=pgp - Email -> Phone: mobile@pethippo.co.uk (Urgent only)
James, main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk?? Which part of ====================== main@lists.alug.org.uk ====================== do you not understand? The email address for the ALUG list is NOT: main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk ... it is: main@lists.alug.org.uk Please update your address book accordingly. Once again, that's: main@lists.alug.org.uk So please stop sending to the incorrect address. One last time. Send your ALUG email to: ====================== main@lists.alug.org.uk ====================== Ok? Oh, and if someone could actually BLOCK the totally wrong main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk address, that would be great, thanks. Any time in the last couple of weeks would be good, before it propagates any further. Andrew. -- All views are my own .... who else would want them?
Andrew Savory <lists@andrewsavory.com> wrote:
Oh, and if someone could actually BLOCK the totally wrong main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk address, that would be great, thanks.
We're trying, but that seems to have been what triggered the last breakage. It wouldn't have caught this case, as there was a little "moderator oversight" and it was approved anyway. As ever, we recommend you filter on the List-Id if you can. MJR
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, MJ Ray wrote:
We're trying, but that seems to have been what triggered the last breakage.
Ah. Ooops. Good luck...
It wouldn't have caught this case, as there was a little "moderator oversight" and it was approved anyway. As ever, we recommend you filter on the List-Id if you can.
Filtering is not the issue, propagating an incorrect address is. I'd hate to think of people emailing the list in 6 months' time only to find their email is rejected ;-) Andrew. -- All views are my own .... who else would want them?
Andrew Savory <lists@andrewsavory.com> wrote:
Filtering is not the issue, propagating an incorrect address is. I'd hate to think of people emailing the list in 6 months' time only to find their email is rejected ;-)
People emailing alug@stu.uea.ac.uk get their emails rejected now. Is it really such a problem?
MJ Ray <markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
Andrew Savory <lists@andrewsavory.com> wrote:
Oh, and if someone could actually BLOCK the totally wrong main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk address, that would be great, thanks. We're trying, but that seems to have been what triggered the last breakage. It wouldn't have caught this case, as there was a little "moderator oversight" and it was approved anyway.
I'm still confused as to how anyone's managed to pick up the blackcatnetworks address; AFAICT it doesn't appear in the headers anywhere, it's not used in the sender envelope and it's not publicised anywhere. I'm obviously wrong about one of these though, either that or Outlook is even more brain damaged that I can possibly comprehend. J.
From: main-admin@lists.alug.org.uk On Behalf Of Jonathan McDowell Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:54 AM
Outlook is even more brain damaged that I can possibly comprehend.
Got it in one!!! :o) Regards, Keith ____________ Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence.
Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> wrote:
I'm still confused as to how anyone's managed to pick up the blackcatnetworks address; AFAICT it doesn't appear in the headers anywhere, it's not used in the sender envelope and it's not publicised anywhere. I'm obviously wrong about one of these though, either that or Outlook is even more brain damaged that I can possibly comprehend.
Something is doing a double-lookup to resolve the name, perhaps. I doubt that, as I don't think lists had its own IP before. Other possibility is incorrect details in the subscription info. Can a recent subscriber confirm or deny that, please? Can we block main@anyotherdomain at the MTA on that computer, please? My first suggestions would be to either use header filters or virtual-host alias files. Thanks, MJR
On Tue, 09 Jul 2002 11:09:48 GMT MJ Ray wrote:
Something is doing a double-lookup to resolve the name, perhaps. I doubt that, as I don't think lists had its own IP before. Other possibility is incorrect details in the subscription info. Can a recent subscriber confirm or deny that, please?
lists.alug.org.uk hasn't had it's own IP address before? I don't believe my configuration was any different to Jonathan's. It doesn't have it's own IP address now - look:- lists.alug.org.uk is an alias for lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk. lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk has address 212.135.138.137 and 212.135.138.137 resolves to terry.blackcatnetworks.co.uk.
Can we block main@anyotherdomain at the MTA on that computer, please? My first suggestions would be to either use header filters or virtual-host alias files.
I would seriously consider trying Mailman 2.1. Despite being a beta, it is considered to be stable and it has *proper* per domain virtual hosting (hooray!) which 2.0.11 and below doesn't do that well. Regards, Martyn the Postman -- Martyn Drake | Email : martyn-d@moving-picture.com Systems Administrator | Web : http://www.moving-picture.com The Moving Picture Company | Phone : +44 (0)20 7494 7853
Martyn Drake <martyn-d@moving-picture.com> wrote:
On Tue, 09 Jul 2002 11:09:48 GMT MJ Ray wrote:
Can we block main@anyotherdomain at the MTA on that computer, please? My first suggestions would be to either use header filters or virtual-host alias files.
Valid suggestions, except for the fact that the mailman config is tied up to the Exim config so it doesn't go via header filters or virtual-host alias files.
I would seriously consider trying Mailman 2.1. Despite being a beta, it is considered to be stable and it has *proper* per domain virtual hosting (hooray!) which 2.0.11 and below doesn't do that well.
Hmmm. That would be good, but it's not exactly something that I'd be happy rolling out without testing and I'd much rather wait for it to be stable. Improved virtual domain support would be great though; I'll have to go and take a look. J.
Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> wrote:
Valid suggestions, except for the fact that the mailman config is tied up to the Exim config so it doesn't go via header filters or virtual-host alias files.
Coo. Care to point me at the docs for doing that, please? It's a new one on me. MJR, drug up through sendmail
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 07:48:52PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> wrote:
Valid suggestions, except for the fact that the mailman config is tied up to the Exim config so it doesn't go via header filters or virtual-host alias files. Coo. Care to point me at the docs for doing that, please? It's a new one on me.
/usr/share/doc/mailman/README.EXIM.gz should enlighten you. Very handy. J. -- /-\ | Barndoors. Barndoors. Barndoors. |@/ Debian GNU/Linux Developer | Profile. Profile. VARILITE! \- |
Jonathan McDowell wrote:
MJ Ray <markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
Andrew Savory <lists@andrewsavory.com> wrote:
Oh, and if someone could actually BLOCK the totally wrong main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk address, that would be great, thanks.
We're trying, but that seems to have been what triggered the last breakage. It wouldn't have caught this case, as there was a little "moderator oversight" and it was approved anyway.
I'm still confused as to how anyone's managed to pick up the blackcatnetworks address; AFAICT it doesn't appear in the headers anywhere, it's not used in the sender envelope and it's not publicised anywhere. I'm obviously wrong about one of these though, either that or Outlook is even more brain damaged that I can possibly comprehend.
It appears in my SMTP logs: Jul 9 12:20:21 harry sendmail[14243]: MAA14243: from=<main-admin@lists.alug.org.uk>, size=3388, class=-60, pri=141388, nrcpts=1, msgid=<20020709121812.5186bfc9.martyn-d@moving-picture.com>, proto=ESMTP, relay=terry.blackcatnetworks.co.uk [212.135.138.137] Cheers, Laurie. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Laurie Brown laurie@brownowl.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> writes:
I'm still confused as to how anyone's managed to pick up the blackcatnetworks address; AFAICT it doesn't appear in the headers anywhere,
Not in this case, no, but it does sometimes: Received: from nemesis.systems.pipex.net ([62.190.223.8]) by terry.blackcatnetworks.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17Rsmd-0003VI-00 for <main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk>; Tue, 09 Jul 2002 12:03:51 +0100 Received: from cloaked.freeserve.co.uk (81-86-163-141.dsl.pipex.com [81.86.163.141]) by nemesis.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D3641600048D for <main@lists.alug.org.uk>; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 12:03:21 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <slrnailgsf.873.markj+0111@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk>
it's not used in the sender envelope and it's not publicised anywhere. I'm obviously wrong about one of these though, either that or Outlook is even more brain damaged that I can possibly comprehend.
Douglas was using "Ximian Evolution 1.0.3 (1.0.3-6)" so it's not clear that Outlook has anything to do with it. -- http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> wrote:
MJ Ray <markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
Andrew Savory <lists@andrewsavory.com> wrote:
Oh, and if someone could actually BLOCK the totally wrong main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk address, that would be great, thanks. We're trying, but that seems to have been what triggered the last breakage. It wouldn't have caught this case, as there was a little "moderator oversight" and it was approved anyway.
I'm still confused as to how anyone's managed to pick up the blackcatnetworks address; AFAICT it doesn't appear in the headers anywhere, it's not used in the sender envelope and it's not publicised anywhere. I'm obviously wrong about one of these though, either that or Outlook is even more brain damaged that I can possibly comprehend.
It appears in my (Ishmail) mail headers in the reading window: From: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> To: main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk Subject: [Alug] Re: List Address Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 11:54:25 +0100 Regards Barry Samuels
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002 bsamuels@beenthere-donethat.org.uk wrote:
It appears in my (Ishmail) mail headers in the reading window:
From: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> To: main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk Subject: [Alug] Re: List Address Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 11:54:25 +0100
Hmmmm, Ishmail is broken then or the systems that you are receiving the mail with are. There is a version 2.1.0 of Ishmail have you thought of giving that a try? Adam -- "Step away from the Cathedral, This Bazaar is loaded" jabberid = quinophex@jabber.earth.li
Adam Bower <abower@thebowery.co.uk> wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002 bsamuels@beenthere-donethat.org.uk wrote:
It appears in my (Ishmail) mail headers in the reading window:
From: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> To: main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk Subject: [Alug] Re: List Address Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 11:54:25 +0100
Hmmmm, Ishmail is broken then
I remain to be convinced. This line appears in the raw mail file in my mail directory: To: main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk so I assume Ishmail is just displaying it as is.
or the systems that you are receiving the mail with are. There is a version 2.1.0 of Ishmail have you thought of giving that a try?
There's nothing in it that would be of benefit.
Adam
Kind regards Barry Samuels
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002 bsamuels@beenthere-donethat.org.uk wrote:
Hmmmm, Ishmail is broken then
I remain to be convinced.
This line appears in the raw mail file in my mail directory:
To: main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk
so I assume Ishmail is just displaying it as is.
or the systems that you are receiving the mail with are. There is a version 2.1.0 of Ishmail have you thought
It sounds as though your mailsystem that is receiving the mail is doing something weird to the headers then. I don't know if this is the ISP who is hosting your domain or something that happens when you download the mail. Although perhaps if Jonathan would check the logs to make sure that there is nothing weird going on when the mail leaves his server just to be on the safe side. Adam -- "Step away from the Cathedral, This Bazaar is loaded" jabberid = quinophex@jabber.earth.li
Just to add my twopen'orth, in case it helps anyone, here's the header I got from Adam's last posting; ---------------------------------------------------------- Received: from intranet-mail.intranet-d2k.kewill.com [10.10.9.49] by kewill.com (SMTPD32-6.06) id A15B5290104; Tue, 09 Jul 2002 11:29:31 -0400 Received: FROM terry.blackcatnetworks.co.uk BY intranet-mail.intranet-d2k.kewill.com ; Tue Jul 09 11:29:29 2002 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=terry.blackcatnetworks.co.uk) by terry.blackcatnetworks.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17RwvW-0007GU-00; Tue, 09 Jul 2002 16:29:18 +0100 Received: from pegasus.mail.eclipse.net.uk ([212.104.129.225]) by terry.blackcatnetworks.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17Rwuv-0007GH-00 for <main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk>; Tue, 09 Jul 2002 16:28:41 +0100 Received: from bagpuss.thebowery (213-152-38-199.dsl.eclipse.net.uk [213.152.38.199]) by pegasus.mail.eclipse.net.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB1EE4FD72; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 16:30:59 +0100 (BST) Received: from abower (helo=localhost) by bagpuss.thebowery with local-esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17RwuK-0004Y8-00; Tue, 09 Jul 2002 16:28:04 +0100 From: Adam Bower <abower@thebowery.co.uk> X-X-Sender: <abower@bagpuss.thebowery> To: <bsamuels@beenthere-donethat.org.uk> Cc: <main@lists.alug.org.uk> Subject: Re[2]: [Alug] Re: List Address In-Reply-To: <E17RwS4-0003Dj-00@DATAMAN1.IBMPEERS> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0207091625080.17453-100000@bagpuss.thebowery> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: main-admin@lists.alug.org.uk Errors-To: main-admin@lists.alug.org.uk X-BeenThere: main@lists.alug.org.uk X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:main-request@lists.alug.org.uk?subject=help> List-Post: <mailto:main@lists.alug.org.uk> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main>, <mailto:main-request@lists.alug.org.uk?subject=subscribe> List-Id: Main ALUG mailing list <main.lists.alug.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.alug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/main>, <mailto:main-request@lists.alug.org.uk?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/main/> X-Original-Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 16:28:04 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 16:28:04 +0100 (BST) X-RCPT-TO: <keith.watson@kewill.com> X-UIDL: 4105 Status: U ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------- Regards, Keith ____________ All that we are is the product of what we have thought. The Dhammapada
bsamuels@beenthere-donethat.org.uk writes:
This line appears in the raw mail file in my mail directory:
To: main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk
so I assume Ishmail is just displaying it as is.
How are you getting your mail delivered to you? Is Fetchmail involved at any point? -- http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Richard Kettlewell <rjk@terraraq.org.uk> wrote:
bsamuels@beenthere-donethat.org.uk writes:
This line appears in the raw mail file in my mail directory:
To: main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk
so I assume Ishmail is just displaying it as is.
How are you getting your mail delivered to you?
Is Fetchmail involved at any point?
Yes I use fetchmail. Barry Samuels
bsamuels@beenthere-donethat.org.uk writes:
Yes I use fetchmail.
I suspect that's where the problem lies, then; I know of no other program stupid enough to attempt to parse "for" parameters. -- http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Richard Kettlewell <rjk@terraraq.org.uk> wrote:
bsamuels@beenthere-donethat.org.uk writes:
This line appears in the raw mail file in my mail directory:
To: main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk
so I assume Ishmail is just displaying it as is.
How are you getting your mail delivered to you?
Is Fetchmail involved at any point?
Oh dear. Don't tell me fetchmail is looking up the address, finding the CNAME and rewriting the address to be that which the CNAME points to? I can change it over to an A, but that's just horrible behaviour. J.
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
Richard Kettlewell <rjk@terraraq.org.uk> wrote:
bsamuels@beenthere-donethat.org.uk writes:
This line appears in the raw mail file in my mail directory:
To: main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk
so I assume Ishmail is just displaying it as is.
How are you getting your mail delivered to you?
Is Fetchmail involved at any point?
Oh dear. Don't tell me fetchmail is looking up the address, finding the CNAME and rewriting the address to be that which the CNAME points to?
I can change it over to an A, but that's just horrible behaviour.
J.
I use fetchmail for receiving mail, and it doesn't do anything nasty to me. When I did reply to this message, it put the correct address in the To line. Did have a problem with fetchmail and multidrop mailboxes, but I've read the friendly manual and sorted that one now :-) Chris -- Chris *************************************************************************** E Mail Chris@glovercc.clara.co.uk WWW http://www.glovercc.clara.co.uk Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh nervously and change the subject. -Anon
Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> writes:
Oh dear. Don't tell me fetchmail is looking up the address, finding the CNAME and rewriting the address to be that which the CNAME points to?
Ah, I should have read the rest of the thread before sending my previous comment l-) Perhaps the 'for' stuff is a red herring after all. Mixing CNAMEs and mail delivery is IMO hopelessly optimistic, and rewriting based on CNAMEs has been happening in some places for years, on the basis of things like RFC1123 5.2.2. Just don't do it. -- http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 05:59:50PM +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> writes:
Oh dear. Don't tell me fetchmail is looking up the address, finding the CNAME and rewriting the address to be that which the CNAME points to? Ah, I should have read the rest of the thread before sending my previous comment l-) Perhaps the 'for' stuff is a red herring after all.
Mixing CNAMEs and mail delivery is IMO hopelessly optimistic, and rewriting based on CNAMEs has been happening in some places for years, on the basis of things like RFC1123 5.2.2. Just don't do it.
Bah humbug. It's been a while since I've been accused of being hopelessly optimistic. I've changed it over to an A now, so hopefully things will sort themselves out. J. -- I'm only here for the salad bar. Ask me about server co-location - info@blackcatnetworks.co.uk
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 11:33:01AM +0100, Andrew Savory wrote:
James,
main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk??
-- Cut the rest of the tosh... Sorry for being in a rush and just hitting Reply to all But not entirly my fault as the mail that i was replying to was sent to the wrong address also. === Cut From: Douglas Willis <ddw@bas.ac.uk> Reply-To: ddw@bas.ac.uk To: main@lists.blackcatnetworks.co.uk === End Sorry for the start of one of Andrew's lovely rants. :)))) -- James `BR` Ray - PGP Key: http://www.pethippo.co.uk/?page=pgp - Email -> Phone: mobile@pethippo.co.uk (Urgent only)
participants (12)
-
Adam Bower -
Andrew Savory -
bsamuels＠beenthere-donethat.org.uk -
Chris Glover -
Douglas Willis -
James Ray -
Jonathan McDowell -
Keith Watson -
Laurie Brown -
Martyn Drake -
MJ Ray -
Richard Kettlewell