September 2002 - WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] WLUG's membership in BUG

by Charles R. Anderson

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 11:34:17PM -0400, Bill Smith wrote: wsmith> Another poster (forgot the name... sorry.) suggested that the $50 would wsmith> be better spent paying for an advert in the paper. i'm inclined to wsmith> agree (although i might lean towards something like the Globe or wsmith> something like that, not just a college paper). wsmith> wsmith> if the matter is still under discussion, i vote "no". My vote is also "no". $50 isn't worth a broken "Javascript" link (doesn't work in lynx or links) on a web site that can't even put our meeting schedule on their calendar. Why do they have a .com anyway? I'm sure we can think of much better ways to spend $50. I love the idea of the ad in the paper, too. Remember, we can always join at a future date if things change. Right now, though, I don't think we got anything out of our last year's membership. Maybe we can invite one of their folk to speak at an upcoming meeting to try to convince us of why we should re-join. Worcester isn't Boston. Maybe we should start our own WorcesterUserGroups.org :) We are, after all, the second largest city in New England... (kidding...) -- Charles R. Anderson <cra(a)wpi.edu> / http://angus.ind.wpi.edu/~cra/ PGP Key ID: 49BB5886 Fingerprint: EBA3 A106 7C93 FA07 8E15 3AC2 C367 A0F9 49BB 5886

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] WLUG's membership in BUG

by Bill Smith

On Fri, 30 Aug 2002 12:17:10 -0400 "Clint Moyer" <cdmoyer(a)charter.net> wrote: CM> I vote YES. It's only $50 and WLUG's cash on hand is well CM> into five figures. ;) CM> CM> If some people feel somewhat bruised by a tangential CM> connection to MS, well that's kind of sad. $50 is $50.... Regardless of the actual COST, I'd think the focus is more of "what does BUG do for US?"... Apparently, not too much. Basically, the benefits are: - Other BUG members will know you exist. - We [BUG] have a once-a-year bash to get everyone the chance to see who else is a BUG. - WLUG gives BUG $50. Another poster (forgot the name... sorry.) suggested that the $50 would be better spent paying for an advert in the paper. i'm inclined to agree (although i might lean towards something like the Globe or something like that, not just a college paper). if the matter is still under discussion, i vote "no". -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- William Smith wsmith-at-chezsmith-dot-com Fall River, MA http://www.chezsmith.com The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity. The rest is overhead for the operating system. * TAG! v3.0 *

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] RH7.3 Questions -round 4

by Richard Goodman

That did the trick! Not only that, there's a comment in the sendmail.mc file just above that line -- only as a non-techie I never looked in sendmail.mc While I was at it I also dnl'd out the FEATURE("accept_unresolvable_domains") line. I believe my access file is tight enough - its been bouncing lots of attempted open relaying for months. Dick >On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 07:33:49PM -0400, Richard Goodman wrote: >dick> Well, I thought everything was working, but sendmail won't receive mail. >dick> Has something changed between the versions of sendmail on >RH7.0 and RH7.3 > >Yes, exactly. Red Hat (or Sendmail, I forget) changed the default for >sendmail to listen only on 127.0.0.1, to prevent insecure default open >mail relays. This is mentioned in the Red Hat 7.3 Release Notes.... > >To fix it, edit /etc/mail/sendmail.mc. Find the line with >"Port=smtp,Addr=127.0.0.1, Name=MTA". Comment it out by putting dnl at >the beginning of that line. Then regenerate the /etc/sendmail.cf from >the mc file like this: > >m4 /etc/mail/sendmail.mc > /etc/sendmail.cf > >And please limit access to sendmail properly so you don't become an open >relay (/etc/mail/access)! > >-- >Charles R. Anderson <cra(a)wpi.edu> / http://angus.ind.wpi.edu/~cra/

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] spamassassin

by Theo Van Dinter

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 09:57:31PM -0400, Charles R. Anderson wrote: > Cool. Why are the RPMs "courtesy of Craig Hughes" then, and point to a > FTP site with 2.20 as the latest? Or was 2.40 the only newer release > since then (a recent release I take it)? I'm not the official distribution site, but I seem to be faster at making RPMs than Craig. The history, BTW, is that Craig made the first 2.[12]* RPMs, and I modified them a bit somewhere around 2.20. They stayed about the same for 2.3, and then completely changed for 2.4 which gathered some errors which I then fixed earlier today. <shrug> It's an interesting project, Justin Mason (the original author) took 6-12 months off to travel around Asia and handed the project to Craig. I think that was around 2.1 or 2.2. Things have been progressing, 2.21, then 2.30, then 2.31, where it stayed for quite a while. Craig decided to start Deersoft for SpamAssassin Pro (Windows-based plugins for Outlook/Exchange), and somewhere in the same period Justin came back. So I'm now not sure who's actually in control of the project, but it's progressing still. I think this is part of the reason why 2.41 is due out shortly. There's been a whole heck of a lot of work put into the 2.40 code, and then the release sorta doesn't go out smoothly, and bugs are found (I'd like to slap the people who changed my Razor2 code) that apparently weren't fully tested with all the other changes. I'm sure it'll get better as we go on. :) -- Randomly Generated Tagline: "With a PC, I always felt limited by the software available. On Unix, I am limited only by my knowledge." - Peter Schoenster

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] spamassassin

by Charles R. Anderson

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 09:51:49PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote: felicity> Yeah, I'm one of the contributing developers ... RPM, Razor2 support, felicity> a handful of other things. :) Cool. Why are the RPMs "courtesy of Craig Hughes" then, and point to a FTP site with 2.20 as the latest? Or was 2.40 the only newer release since then (a recent release I take it)? -- Charles R. Anderson <cra(a)wpi.edu> / http://angus.ind.wpi.edu/~cra/ PGP Key ID: 49BB5886 Fingerprint: EBA3 A106 7C93 FA07 8E15 3AC2 C367 A0F9 49BB 5886

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] spamassassin

by Theo Van Dinter

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 09:44:06PM -0400, Charles R. Anderson wrote: > So, do you have 2.40 packaged in RPM yet? I see you did 2.20: Yeah, it's been up at http://www.kluge.net/ftp/pub/felicity/SRPMS/ for a day or so now. I would wait for 2.41 which is due out in the next day or so... Several bugs have surfaced in 2.40 that we're crunching on to fix. > * Fri Apr 19 2002 Theo Van Dinter <felicity(a)kluge.net> Yeah, I'm one of the contributing developers ... RPM, Razor2 support, a handful of other things. :) -- Randomly Generated Tagline: "Good judgment comes from bad experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment." - Zen Musings

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] spamassassin

by Charles R. Anderson

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 08:56:44PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote: felicity> Actually it did: Oops. I hate when search next finds the same match that you are on...Know how to fix that in Mutt? felicity> That rule was modified in 2.40 to be case sensitive, so it doesn't match felicity> any longer. :) There was a push to get rid of single-word tests. So, do you have 2.40 packaged in RPM yet? I see you did 2.20: * Fri Apr 19 2002 Theo Van Dinter <felicity(a)kluge.net> - Updated for 2.20 release - made /etc/mail/spamassassin a config directory so local.cf doesn't get wiped out - added a patch to remove findbin stuff -- Charles R. Anderson <cra(a)wpi.edu> / http://angus.ind.wpi.edu/~cra/ PGP Key ID: 49BB5886 Fingerprint: EBA3 A106 7C93 FA07 8E15 3AC2 C367 A0F9 49BB 5886

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] WLUG's membership in BUG

by brad

On Sunday 01 September 2002 04:39 pm, George Metz wrote: > Boston User Groups was started as a corporate-sponsored way to get US > Datacenters into the User Group scene, as it were. I recall meeting the people from US Datacenters at a Boston Linux Unix install fest a few years back. They would periodicly attend BLU meetings. I was not impressed with them. It seems that we get all the exposure we need with google. my vote is no. --brad

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] spamassassin

by Theo Van Dinter

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 08:29:11PM -0400, Charles R. Anderson wrote: > Heh...somehow SpamAssassin flagged this as a Viagra spam :) Interesting, > since it didn't mention Viagra anywhere... Stop talking dirty Keith! Actually it did: "How is this possible with all the great deals on Viagra that come through the Internet every day!? He goes on to taunt" BTW: the message gets -6.5 in 2.4x. :) That rule was modified in 2.40 to be case sensitive, so it doesn't match any longer. :) There was a push to get rid of single-word tests. -- Randomly Generated Tagline: "One should admire Windows users. It takes a great deal of courage to trust Windows with your data." - Unknown

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] RH7.3 Questions -round 4

by Charles R. Anderson

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 07:33:49PM -0400, Richard Goodman wrote: dick> Well, I thought everything was working, but sendmail won't receive mail. dick> Has something changed between the versions of sendmail on RH7.0 and RH7.3 Yes, exactly. Red Hat (or Sendmail, I forget) changed the default for sendmail to listen only on 127.0.0.1, to prevent insecure default open mail relays. This is mentioned in the Red Hat 7.3 Release Notes.... To fix it, edit /etc/mail/sendmail.mc. Find the line with "Port=smtp,Addr=127.0.0.1, Name=MTA". Comment it out by putting dnl at the beginning of that line. Then regenerate the /etc/sendmail.cf from the mc file like this: m4 /etc/mail/sendmail.mc > /etc/sendmail.cf And please limit access to sendmail properly so you don't become an open relay (/etc/mail/access)! -- Charles R. Anderson <cra(a)wpi.edu> / http://angus.ind.wpi.edu/~cra/ PGP Key ID: 49BB5886 Fingerprint: EBA3 A106 7C93 FA07 8E15 3AC2 C367 A0F9 49BB 5886

Sept. 4, 2002