[FUGSPBR] Duvida Patch Qmail

[Vini]

Oi,

Por default só o "oversize DNS" é aplicado, desses outros acho que 
nenhum está no ports, mas vc pode tranquilamente aplicar na mão dentro 
do diretorio work no diretorio do qmail.

Depois é só instalar normalmente.

Até mais
Vini

Carlos escreveu:
> Pessoal
> Quando instalo o Qmail via ports os patchs ja são atualizados como os 
> abaixo?
> 
> # Apply patch that allows qmail to work with oversize DNS packets
> patch -p1 < ../qmail-103.patch
> 
> # Apply the "qmailqueue" patch
> # This patch gives you the required support for other popular addons 
> like Qmail-Scanner
> patch -p1 < ../qmailqueue-patch
> 
> # Apply patch to make qmail-local and qmail-pop3d compatible with the 
> maildir++ quota
> # system that is used by vpopmail and courier-imap
> patch < ../qmail-maildir++.patch
> 
> # Apply patch for local timestamps.
> # This will make the emails headers be written in localtime rather than GMT
> patch -p1 < ../qmail-date-localtime.patch.txt
> 
> # Build support for "badmailfrom logging"
> # and also build support for badrcptto functionality and logging
> patch < ../qmail-badmailfrom-badrcptto.patch.txt
> 
> # Apply patch to add ESMTP SIZE support to qmail-smtpd
> # This helps your server be able to reject excessively large messages 
> "up front",
> # rather than waiting for the whole message to arrive and then bouncing 
> it because
> # exceeded your /var/qmail/control/databytes setting
> patch < ../qmail-smtpd-esmtp-size.diff.txt
> 
> # Apply patch to limit the size of bounce messages generated by our server.
> # The patch will limit the size of the bounce to be 50K,
> # or you can override this by setting a different value in 
> /var/qmail/control/bouncemaxbytes
> patch < ../qmail-limit-bounce-size.patch.txt
> 
> Edit qmail-smtpd.c and change the code on the straynewline function 
> (around line 51) from 451 to 553
> Without this you will get nasty loops forming when a remote servers 
> sends you an message with invalid
> formatting. By default qmail will says something like  "I am not going 
> to accept that message at the
> moment, you can try again later". However in my experience the sending 
> server will try sending the
> same message again a few seconds later, and this will go around and 
> around in a loop for days on end
> - consuming valuable bandwidth and resources. By changing the error code 
> to 553, it is making the
> error be permanent ie "I am not going to accept that message, don't try 
> sending it again"
> 
> 


_______________________________________________________________
Sair da Lista: http://lists.fugspbr.org/listinfo.cgi
Historico: http://www4.fugspbr.org/lista/html/FUG-BR/