Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Postfix not speaking with amavis?

Expand Messages
  • Wietse Venema
    ... Some process with UID=1095 invoked the Postfix sendmail command. ... Wrong question. Right question: Why do I have processes with an UID that has no
    Message 1 of 19 , May 15, 2013
      Postfix:
      > I have a feeling it has something to do with this:
      >
      > postfix/sendmail[29314]: fatal: no login name found for user ID 1095

      Some process with UID=1095 invoked the Postfix sendmail command.

      > Why is postfix trying to use a non existing user? I did not compile it with

      Wrong question.

      Right question:

      "Why do I have processes with an UID that has no password file entry?"

      Wietse
    • Postfix
      I assume this is why my mail is not being delivered, but how does a process use a non existing user id? There are no files on the system with that id, and no
      Message 2 of 19 , May 15, 2013
        I assume this is why my mail is not being delivered, but how does a process
        use a non existing user id?
        There are no files on the system with that id, and no processes that I see
        running with that user id.

        Unless amavis or postfix is coming hardwired with this user id, how can I
        possibly find what is using it?
        This is a new setup with not much on it.

        -----Original Message-----
        From: owner-postfix-users@...
        [mailto:owner-postfix-users@...] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema
        Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 8:26 AM
        To: Postfix users
        Subject: Re: Postfix not speaking with amavis?

        Postfix:
        > I have a feeling it has something to do with this:
        >
        > postfix/sendmail[29314]: fatal: no login name found for user ID 1095

        Some process with UID=1095 invoked the Postfix sendmail command.

        > Why is postfix trying to use a non existing user? I did not compile it
        with

        Wrong question.

        Right question:

        "Why do I have processes with an UID that has no password file entry?"

        Wietse
      • Wietse Venema
        ... Perhaps the Postfix sendmail command is invoked by a program that has no read permission for the UNIX password database. Check your SElinux, AppArmor, etc.
        Message 3 of 19 , May 15, 2013
          Postfix:
          > postfix/sendmail[29314]: fatal: no login name found for user ID 1095

          Wietse:
          > Some process with UID=1095 invoked the Postfix sendmail command.

          Postfix:
          > I assume this is why my mail is not being delivered, but how does a process
          > use a non existing user id?

          Perhaps the Postfix sendmail command is invoked by a program
          that has no read permission for the UNIX password database.

          Check your SElinux, AppArmor, etc. logs for warnings.

          Wietse
        • Postfix
          The passwd file is world readable. The question is, what happens to mail after it is put into the postfix/hold folder? I have removed amavis as an option from
          Message 4 of 19 , May 15, 2013
            The passwd file is world readable.

            The question is, what happens to mail after it is put into the postfix/hold
            folder?
            I have removed amavis as an option from master and main .cf

            Postqueue -f does nothing that I can see, there are no errors in the log
            file, all outgoing and incoming mail stays in the hold folder.

            What is the next step postfix should do after mail is in the hold folder?



            -----Original Message-----
            From: owner-postfix-users@...
            [mailto:owner-postfix-users@...] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema
            Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 9:49 AM
            To: Postfix users
            Subject: Re: Postfix not speaking with amavis?

            Postfix:
            > postfix/sendmail[29314]: fatal: no login name found for user ID 1095

            Wietse:
            > Some process with UID=1095 invoked the Postfix sendmail command.

            Postfix:
            > I assume this is why my mail is not being delivered, but how does a
            > process use a non existing user id?

            Perhaps the Postfix sendmail command is invoked by a program that has no
            read permission for the UNIX password database.

            Check your SElinux, AppArmor, etc. logs for warnings.

            Wietse
          • /dev/rob0
            You are playing guessing games with the author of Postfix. Please don t waste his time like that. Also, he has been fixing your top- posting. Please stop doing
            Message 5 of 19 , May 15, 2013
              You are playing guessing games with the author of Postfix. Please
              don't waste his time like that. Also, he has been fixing your top-
              posting. Please stop doing that, also. Thank you.

              > Postfix:
              > > postfix/sendmail[29314]: fatal: no login name found for user ID
              > > 1095
              >
              > Wietse:
              > > Some process with UID=1095 invoked the Postfix sendmail command.
              >
              > Postfix:
              > > I assume this is why my mail is not being delivered, but how does
              > > a process use a non existing user id?

              Wietse:
              > Perhaps the Postfix sendmail command is invoked by a program that
              > has no read permission for the UNIX password database.
              >
              > Check your SElinux, AppArmor, etc. logs for warnings.
              >
              On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 11:10:35AM -0700, Postfix wrote:
              > The passwd file is world readable.

              Fine. However, this did not address the SElinux, AppArmor, et c.
              issues. Another possible guess is that you're using one of the Linux
              distributions which unwisely changed the upstream Postfix default of
              no chrooted services in master.cf.

              > The question is, what happens to mail after it is put into the
              > postfix/hold folder?

              Is it? I thought it was "Postfix not speaking with amavis?" This is
              the first mention of the "postfix/hold folder", by which I suppose
              you mean the hold queue.

              Postfix does nothing with the hold queue unless/until instructed to
              do so. It's on "hold". See "man postsuper", -h|-H, and "man qmgr",
              section MAIL QUEUES, hold.

              > I have removed amavis as an option from master and main .cf

              Sometimes this requires a requeue of already-queued messages which
              were set to go through amavisd. See "man postsuper" again, -r this
              time.

              > Postqueue -f does nothing that I can see, there are no errors in
              > the log file, all outgoing and incoming mail stays in the hold
              > folder.
              >
              > What is the next step postfix should do after mail is in the hold
              > folder?

              Nothing. It's on "hold" until you release it.

              One might wonder how/why this mail is on hold, but I won't ask.
              Instead, I will ask you to review this link before posting again:

              http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail

              That is likely to get to the root of the problem with no further
              guessing.
              --
              http://rob0.nodns4.us/ -- system administration and consulting
              Offlist GMX mail is seen only if "/dev/rob0" is in the Subject:
            • Wietse Venema
              ... There is no message in the queue. Postfix NEVER ACCEPTED THE MAIL. Wietse
              Message 6 of 19 , May 15, 2013
                Postfix:
                > The passwd file is world readable.
                >
                > The question is, what happens to mail after it is put into the postfix/hold
                > folder?

                There is no message in the queue. Postfix NEVER ACCEPTED THE MAIL.

                Wietse
              • Wietse Venema
                ... Oops, if the message came from a content filter, there will be a message in the deferred queue that awaits processing by the filter. Wietse
                Message 7 of 19 , May 15, 2013
                  Wietse Venema:
                  > Postfix:
                  > > The passwd file is world readable.
                  > >
                  > > The question is, what happens to mail after it is put into the postfix/hold
                  > > folder?
                  >
                  > There is no message in the queue. Postfix NEVER ACCEPTED THE MAIL.

                  Oops, if the message came from a content filter, there will be
                  a message in the deferred queue that awaits processing by the filter.

                  Wietse
                • Postfix
                  ... the deferred queue that awaits processing by the filter. ... Thanks, I am misunderstanding how postfix handles mail. I had assumed incoming mail is put
                  Message 8 of 19 , May 15, 2013
                    Wietse Venema:
                    > Postfix:
                    > > The passwd file is world readable.
                    > >
                    > > The question is, what happens to mail after it is put into the
                    > > postfix/hold folder?
                    >
                    > There is no message in the queue. Postfix NEVER ACCEPTED THE MAIL.

                    >Oops, if the message came from a content filter, there will be a message in
                    the deferred queue that awaits processing by the filter.

                    > Wietse

                    Thanks, I am misunderstanding how postfix handles mail. I had assumed
                    incoming mail is put into the hold folder, then from there any filtering
                    software like amavis or mailscanner would pick it up scan it then pass it
                    back to postfix where it would then get put into the other queues.

                    I have given up and re-imaged the server, going to try from scratch again. I
                    have done a few postfix setups before this with postfix and mailscanner with
                    no problems, but this has been my first attempt at using amavis.
                    I messed around with the server settings, figure it would be good to start
                    over.

                    Maybe the problem is I have used the amavis debian packages but then
                    compiled postfix from source. I would like to use the latest postfix, but
                    maybe I have to stick with the debian package of postfix even though it is
                    out of date.
                  • Quanah Gibson-Mount
                    --On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 3:08 PM -0700 Postfix ... If you re really bored, you could download Zimbra FOSS edition and install it just to look at how
                    Message 9 of 19 , May 15, 2013
                      --On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 3:08 PM -0700 Postfix
                      <postfix_list@...> wrote:

                      > Thanks, I am misunderstanding how postfix handles mail. I had assumed
                      > incoming mail is put into the hold folder, then from there any filtering
                      > software like amavis or mailscanner would pick it up scan it then pass it
                      > back to postfix where it would then get put into the other queues.

                      If you're really bored, you could download Zimbra FOSS edition and install
                      it just to look at how postfix is configured to talk with Amavis (and SA
                      via Amavis).

                      --Quanah


                      --

                      Quanah Gibson-Mount
                      Sr. Member of Technical Staff
                      Zimbra, Inc
                      A Division of VMware, Inc.
                      --------------------
                      Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
                    • Stan Hoeppner
                      ... This is not how it works. Postfix/amavisd may communicate via SMTP, LMTP, or through a Unix pipe or inet socket. Amavisd never reads files directly from
                      Message 10 of 19 , May 15, 2013
                        On 5/15/2013 5:08 PM, Postfix wrote:

                        > Thanks, I am misunderstanding how postfix handles mail. I had assumed
                        > incoming mail is put into the hold folder, then from there any filtering
                        > software like amavis or mailscanner would pick it up scan it then pass it
                        > back to postfix where it would then get put into the other queues.

                        This is not how it works. Postfix/amavisd may communicate via SMTP,
                        LMTP, or through a Unix pipe or inet socket. Amavisd never reads files
                        directly from Postfix queues.

                        You are confused because you have previously used Mailscanner, which is
                        not supported by Postfix. It is not supported precisely because of the
                        way it manipulates files directly in Postfix queue directories instead
                        of using a supported Postfix API.
                        ...
                        > Maybe the problem is I have used the amavis debian packages but then
                        > compiled postfix from source. I would like to use the latest postfix, but
                        > maybe I have to stick with the debian package of postfix even though it is
                        > out of date.

                        I think your problem is that you simply haven't learned enough yet and
                        have not configured the interfaces properly.

                        And your definition of "out of date", your thinking here, is flawed.
                        Debian Stable 7 was just released and includes Postfix 2.9.6, which is
                        the most recent 2.9 upstream patch level. Only Wietse's current
                        upstream stable, is 2.10 patch level 0, is newer. If you'd look at the
                        2.10 change log you'd see that you likely don't the few additional new
                        features not in 2.9.6. You also likely don't need 80% or more of the
                        Postfix features going back to Postfix 2.0.

                        You're making incorrect assumptions about the usefulness of software
                        based solely on revision numbers, of which you apparently have little or
                        no understanding. You must be a very wealthy man, as you most certainly
                        buy a new car on Jan 1 of each year, as your current car must be "out of
                        date" at that point, i.e. 2012 vs 2013.

                        --
                        Stan
                      • Viktor Dukhovni
                        ... [ Editorial comment. ] With Reindl off the list, in part at Stan s suggestion, Stan should try to not pick up too much of the slack... -- Viktor.
                        Message 11 of 19 , May 15, 2013
                          On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:37:14PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:

                          > You're making incorrect assumptions about the usefulness of software
                          > based solely on revision numbers, of which you apparently have little or
                          > no understanding. You must be a very wealthy man, as you most certainly
                          > buy a new car on Jan 1 of each year, as your current car must be "out of
                          > date" at that point, i.e. 2012 vs 2013.

                          [ Editorial comment. ]

                          With Reindl off the list, in part at Stan's suggestion, Stan should
                          try to not pick up too much of the slack...

                          --
                          Viktor.
                        • Wietse Venema
                          ... +1 Keep it friendly, Stan! Wietse
                          Message 12 of 19 , May 15, 2013
                            Viktor Dukhovni:
                            > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:37:14PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
                            >
                            > > You're making incorrect assumptions about the usefulness of software
                            > > based solely on revision numbers, of which you apparently have little or
                            > > no understanding. You must be a very wealthy man, as you most certainly
                            > > buy a new car on Jan 1 of each year, as your current car must be "out of
                            > > date" at that point, i.e. 2012 vs 2013.
                            >
                            > [ Editorial comment. ]
                            >
                            > With Reindl off the list, in part at Stan's suggestion, Stan should
                            > try to not pick up too much of the slack...

                            +1

                            Keep it friendly, Stan!

                            Wietse
                          • Stan Hoeppner
                            ... Bah, you re both New Yorkers so you surely must be plenty familiar with sarcasm. Ok, Wietse lives a little farther up state and spends all of his time at
                            Message 13 of 19 , May 16, 2013
                              On 5/15/2013 7:21 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
                              > Viktor Dukhovni:
                              >> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:37:14PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
                              >>
                              >>> You're making incorrect assumptions about the usefulness of software
                              >>> based solely on revision numbers, of which you apparently have little or
                              >>> no understanding. You must be a very wealthy man, as you most certainly
                              >>> buy a new car on Jan 1 of each year, as your current car must be "out of
                              >>> date" at that point, i.e. 2012 vs 2013.
                              >>
                              >> [ Editorial comment. ]
                              >>
                              >> With Reindl off the list, in part at Stan's suggestion, Stan should
                              >> try to not pick up too much of the slack...
                              >
                              > +1
                              >
                              > Keep it friendly, Stan!

                              Bah, you're both New Yorkers so you surely must be plenty familiar with
                              sarcasm. Ok, Wietse lives a little farther up state and spends all of
                              his time at home or in the funny shaped IBM building with no windows, so
                              he may not see that much sarcasm. ;) But Viktor you've worked in the
                              city, may still, and you may live there for all I know, so surely you
                              see sarcasm every day. But it's not just part of New York culture, but
                              American culture. It's a powerful literary tool used by hundreds of
                              thousands of publications and people daily.

                              Sure, Reindl used sarcasm, but he also cursed at people and called them
                              stupid, among other things. This was my beef with him. I don't do such
                              things. Lumping me in with Reindl simply for using sarcasm is painting
                              with a very broad brush and simply not kosher.

                              If you want to make it a blanket rule that straight sarcasm is not
                              allowed on the list then I'll abide by that. I think that would be
                              pretty silly, given that sarcasm permeates our society, at least
                              American society. Apparently you two don't watch Leno, Letterman, any
                              late night comics, as sarcasm abounds on such shows, to name only a few.
                              Of course they say it with a smile.

                              If I'd added a winky at the end, would that have prevented all of this?
                              As I'd have said it with a smile? Making it "lighter" and not
                              perceived as being rude?

                              Sheesh...

                              --
                              Stan
                            • Wietse Venema
                              ... Stan, Viktor and I were looking from the perspective of the receiver, i.e. the person whose question you replied to. The odds are good that their cultural
                              Message 14 of 19 , May 16, 2013
                                Stan Hoeppner:
                                > On 5/15/2013 7:21 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
                                > > Viktor Dukhovni:
                                > >> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:37:14PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
                                > >>
                                > >>> You're making incorrect assumptions about the usefulness of software
                                > >>> based solely on revision numbers, of which you apparently have little or
                                > >>> no understanding. You must be a very wealthy man, as you most certainly
                                > >>> buy a new car on Jan 1 of each year, as your current car must be "out of
                                > >>> date" at that point, i.e. 2012 vs 2013.
                                > >>
                                > >> [ Editorial comment. ]
                                > >>
                                > >> With Reindl off the list, in part at Stan's suggestion, Stan should
                                > >> try to not pick up too much of the slack...
                                > >
                                > > +1
                                > >
                                > > Keep it friendly, Stan!
                                >
                                > Bah, you're both New Yorkers so you surely must be plenty familiar with
                                > sarcasm. Ok, Wietse lives a little farther up state and spends all of

                                Stan, Viktor and I were looking from the perspective of the receiver,
                                i.e. the person whose question you replied to. The odds are good
                                that their cultural background differs from yours. In fact, the far
                                majority of people do not have English as their primary language.

                                One well-known limitation of email is that it is single-modal. The
                                receiver does not get any hints from voice, face expression or body
                                language that a response is sarcastic or not.

                                So, keep it friendly, and if you must add sarcasm, make it plenty
                                redundantly clear. Recall that a lot of nuance/innuendo/jokes will
                                not come across as most people are not native English speakers.

                                Wietse
                              • Viktor Dukhovni
                                On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 07:27:59AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: [begin hostility] ... [end hostility] [begin sarcasm] ... [end sarcasm] ... Chill out and keep
                                Message 15 of 19 , May 16, 2013
                                  On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 07:27:59AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:

                                  [begin hostility]
                                  > >>> You're making incorrect assumptions about the usefulness of software
                                  > >>> based solely on revision numbers, of which you apparently have little or
                                  > >>> no understanding.
                                  [end hostility]

                                  [begin sarcasm]
                                  > >>>You must be a very wealthy man, as you most certainly
                                  > >>> buy a new car on Jan 1 of each year, as your current car must be "out of
                                  > >>> date" at that point, i.e. 2012 vs 2013.
                                  [end sarcasm]

                                  > >> [ Editorial comment. ]
                                  > >>
                                  > >> With Reindl off the list, in part at Stan's suggestion, Stan should
                                  > >> try to not pick up too much of the slack...
                                  > >
                                  > > +1
                                  > >
                                  > > Keep it friendly, Stan!

                                  > Sure, Reindl used sarcasm, but he also cursed at people and called them
                                  > stupid, among other things. This was my beef with him. I don't do such
                                  > things. Lumping me in with Reindl simply for using sarcasm is painting
                                  > with a very broad brush and simply not kosher.

                                  Chill out and keep it civil. Thanks.

                                  > If you want to make it a blanket rule that straight sarcasm is not
                                  > allowed on the list then I'll abide by that.

                                  Give it a try, sarcasm on public mailing lists is not terribly useful.

                                  > If I'd added a winky at the end, would that have prevented all of this?

                                  Probably not. Just think it to yourself, smile if you enjoyed the
                                  wit and don't mail it.

                                  --
                                  Viktor.
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.