On Wed March 22 2006 12:48 pm, Allen wrote:

...

I  have recently acquired and installed SUSE 9.2 - Using Yast2 I configured Fetchmail to collect my e-mails from my ISP, and process them through AMAVIS (antivirus) however initially these were not delivered to my Kmail mailbox. I think (hope) this has now been resolved however I am aware that a vast quantity of "missing" mail is still un-delivered and apparently sitting in a /var/spool/amavis/tmp directory - Can anyone suggest how I can retrieve this mail ?

Hey man, Kmail has something for grabbing Email for you, and that's what you should use if you want to use Kmail. When you use Fetchmail it takes all the mail and makes it local, so to check it you'll want to use either Pine, or Mutt. Mainly mutt.

you can also setup kmail for a local user, I do. that way I keep kmail running and I get all the system messages sent to a local user, who is setup with kmail. You can set this up a number of ways, just check settings-kmail-accounts-receiving-local user. -- Paul Cartwright Registered Linux user # 367800 X-Request-PGP: http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-pcartwright/key.asc

Many thanks Allen - it seems new mail is arriving as expected - but the mail that was collected during my initial attempts ( which looks like a shed load ) is still apparently in an inaccessible directory - any thoughts welcome Arthur On Wednesday 22 March 2006 17:48, Allen wrote:

On Wednesday 22 March 2006 12:28 pm, Arthur System Admin wrote:

...

Hi everybody, As a novice to linux please forgive if this mail is to the wrong group and direct me to a more appropriate one.

I have recently acquired and installed SUSE 9.2 - Using Yast2 I configured Fetchmail to collect my e-mails from my ISP, and process them through AMAVIS (antivirus) however initially these were not delivered to my Kmail mailbox. I think (hope) this has now been resolved however I am aware that a vast quantity of "missing" mail is still un-delivered and apparently sitting in a /var/spool/amavis/tmp directory - Can anyone suggest how I can retrieve this mail ?

Hey man, Kmail has something for grabbing Email for you, and that's what you should use if you want to use Kmail. When you use Fetchmail it takes all the mail and makes it local, so to check it you'll want to use either Pine, or Mutt. Mainly mutt.

I have my boxes set up with fetchmail too and Mutt is what I use for email without problems.

I do have Kmail which is what I'm using now because some email I recieve requires a GUI client, and you should set up Kmail to fetch the email itself to avoid this problem.

Just type mutt on a console. If it doesn't load, pop in the CDs and open yast and tell it to install Mutt.

-Allen

-- Its not the way that you say it, when you do those things to me Its more the way that you mean it, when you tell those things to me

On Wednesday 22 March 2006 18:42, Sandy Drobic wrote:

First find out how your system processes emails. It sounds as if you have the following chain:

fetchmail -> postfix -> amavis -> postfix -> local delivery

Now, this local delivery can happen in several ways. Either the mails are stored in /var/spool/mail/username, home/username/mail or a pop/imap server is receiving them for storage/retrieval.

If you are using postfix, it should log to /var/log/mail where you can see where postfix finally delivers the mail.

Sandy

Thanks sandy, on further investigation I think I may have 2 problems 1. I suspect amavis is keeping copies of ALL incoming mail ( or postfix is not deleting them once delivered ? ) 2. Postfix itself has a number of deferred / defer entries in its own /var/spool/postfix/deferred/ & /var/spool/postfix/defer/ as a novice could you indicate how I can check this please ? Many thanks Arthur -- Its not the way that you say it, when you do those things to me Its more the way that you mean it, when you tell those things to me

On Wednesday 22 March 2006 21:30, Sandy Drobic wrote: <snip>

Postfix has nothing to do with mails once they are delivered to amavis. What Amavis does with the mails is up to your config. I think by default amavis will also log to /var/log/mail.

...

2. Postfix itself has a number of deferred / defer entries in its own /var/spool/postfix/deferred/ & /var/spool/postfix/defer/

A wise man once said "a mailqueue is like a toilet. First you get rid of the blocking problem, THEN you flush. Otherwise you will only make the mess worse..."

So I suggest you look for the problem that postfix has and is causing the deferred mails. Then fix it and only then tell postfix to requeue the mails for delivery again.

What does "egrep -i '(fatal|panic|warn)' /var/log/mail" say? The most important errors will probably show up first.

egrep lists 2 types of warnings, (hundreds of times over) but all dated 22nd March - none since, which puzzles me given that the offending directory has all dates upto yesterday (and probably today now also) Mar 22 09:56:07 GSLOCAL amavis[14780]: (14780-01) WARN: all primary virus scanners failed, considering backups & Mar 22 09:56:35 GSLOCAL postfix/qmgr[14887]: C956377B01: from=, size=55815, nrcpt=1 (queue active) I have tried postfix check which reports no errors, and flush which released 2 mails -- Its not the way that you say it, when you do those things to me Its more the way that you mean it, when you tell those things to me

Hi, been having a debate at work about our new hosting platform. Basically we offer basic dedicated linux server hosting where each user gets their own identical linux box to run web, mysql and qmail services. The servers are managed by ourselves and we look after OS patches, security, software etc. The platform on a whole will be centrally managed where we can PXE boot servers and role out a complete production server, role out patches and new software etc. Nothing unusual there! However the platform is quite large and could be running up to 1000 servers. The debate centres on which distro to use, we can't go down the Enterprise Linux route due to costs. Given the numbers of servers we don't want to have to upgrade the OS every 5 minutes because the distro we're using is no longer supported. Most of our enterprise linux boxes are running Red Hat so an obvious immediate choice would be Fedora, however it seems largely a development platform for RHEL and they stop supporting old versions after 18 months which means we'd either have to upgrade all the servers to the current release (which could cause problems as upgrades do) or back port security fixes ourselves which isn't cost effective. In addition Fedora's legacy support isn't very good which runs the risks of breaking customers code. Suse is my personal distro of choice and has support for 3 years, upgrading the OS every 3 years is obviously far less of a concern and IMO the legacy support is better. However given the launch of Open Suse I'm concerned that this will spell the demise of Suse Pro and thus I'll have another Fedora on my hands. Do we know if this is likely to be the case? If so we'd probably be looking at Gentoo or Ubuntu the concerns with them are that it will introduce another flavour of Unix into our data centres (Currently have to manage Solaris, HP-UX, AS400, Suse, Suse Enterprise, Fedora, Red Hat Enterprise, Free BSD and Windows 2K & 2K3 boxes). Thought it would be interesting to hear folks views on here. Matthew

On Friday 24 March 2006 11:21, Steve Graegert wrote:

Unless your users are responsible for their boxes you'll do much better with Solaris and/or BSD (choose your flavor).

\Steve

Should add that we're responsible for the boxes customers don't get root access. However our current platform runs on FreeBSD, but the problem we're having there is that the hardware compatability isn't as good as Linux, this is bargain basement hosting and the servers we're using are essentially desktops, we find that the chipset revisions are constantly changing and frequently find that BSD won't install on a new server that was supposed to be identical to our current stock without manual intervention. Linux suffers with this problem far less which makes deployment costs lower. Matthew

On Friday 24 March 2006 11:50, Steve Graegert wrote:

Ok, so your hardware platforms are changing constantly? This makes things different. With a free Linux distribution you're always at risk that support for security updates will end some day. Usually, it should not be that hard to patch server systems manually (assisted by some sort of automation). My recommendation in this case: Debian.

\Steve

It's not that we want the hardware to change as we always buy the same boards where possible, however we find that hardware revisions can change several times a year and often we're forced to buy newer boards. Not a fan of Debian as it's under developed took loads of munching to get it to install on our current boxes, which is why we were looking at Ubuntu. Matthew

I think the answer is easy. CentOS. I think (could be wrong) that they have a 5 year lifespan for a specific release. Lifesapn meaning patch and security support. It's based on Red Hat/Fedora so there should be no surprises there. http://www.centos.org/ -- ============================================== I am only human, please forgive me if I make a mistake it is not deliberate. ============================================== Xmas may be over but, PLEASE DON'T drink and drive you'll make it to the next one that way. Kevan Farmer Linux user #373362 Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR

On 3/24/06, Ken Schneider wrote:

On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 12:50 +0100, Steve Graegert wrote:

...

On 3/24/06, Matthew Stringer wrote:

...

Should add that we're responsible for the boxes customers don't get root access.

However our current platform runs on FreeBSD, but the problem we're having there is that the hardware compatability isn't as good as Linux, this is bargain basement hosting and the servers we're using are essentially desktops, we find that the chipset revisions are constantly changing and frequently find that BSD won't install on a new server that was supposed to be identical to our current stock without manual intervention. Linux suffers with this problem far less which makes deployment costs lower.

Ok, so your hardware platforms are changing constantly? This makes things different. With a free Linux distribution you're always at risk that support for security updates will end some day. Usually, it should not be that hard to patch server systems manually (assisted by some sort of automation). My recommendation in this case: Debian.

Why not use a more powerful server and then use VMWare GSX server and create virtual machines? That way the -hardware- is always the same. Or use Zen.

I do Zen everyday but it refuses to run my virtual machines :-) \Steve

On Friday 24 March 2006 12:49, Ken Schneider wrote:

Why not use a more powerful server and then use VMWare GSX server and create virtual machines? That way the -hardware- is always the same. Or use Zen.

Virtual servers are a different product so can't use that, we have them elsewhere. Debian is underdeveloped in the sense that it has similar hardware compatibility problems like BSD does. Tested it on our current machines and it would not run out of the box don' t want to be constantly tweaking OS and Kernel to get it to work every time there's a new chipset/RAID card/NIC revision change. Will investigate CentOS. Cheers Matthew

Hi,

been having a debate at work about our new hosting platform.

Basically we offer basic dedicated linux server hosting where each user gets their own identical linux box to run web, mysql and qmail services. Just to add a bit to the mix, you might consider using an auto-install system. Take a look at SuSE's AutoYast and Red Hat's Kickstart or HP-UX's ignite. Additionally, Linux COE The HP Linux Common Operating Environment (LinuxCOE) is a global IT engineering program which facilitates provisioning and lifecycle support of Linux systems. Key deliverables are to increase reliability, availability,

On Friday 24 March 2006 6:10 am, Matthew Stringer wrote: maintainability and performance of global infrastructure and production environments by maintaining a minimum number of platform and component configurations. http://linuxcoe.sourceforge.net/ Note that Linux COE is distribution neutral. -- Jerry Feldman Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9 PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9

On 25/03/06, kai wrote:

Easy answer - CentOS.

CentOS == Redhat (free version)

You won't get the latest/greatest hardware compatibility (usb dual-inline-ifiniferator wma compatible smartphone video displays) but you will get the same enterprise longevity as SLES or RHE. --

That's exactly what I said.....days ago :-)))) great minds, eh? I have a friend who is actually running CentOS in a business environment. It works perfectly. -- ============================================== I am only human, please forgive me if I make a mistake it is not deliberate. ============================================== Xmas may be over but, PLEASE DON'T drink and drive you'll make it to the next one that way. Kevan Farmer Linux user #373362 Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR

On 27/03/06, kai wrote:

Ahh, yes. I didn't see your post.

No problem, like I say, great minds :-)) Actually, I've noticed more than once that I've made a suggestion and the post doesn't seem to have appeared. Then I've had a post that comes in half way through a thread? The original post never does turn up...strange.

Only comment on your post is that - IIRC - RedHat and CentOS plan to have support for any given OS release for seven years, like SLES.

Yeah, I wasn't sure exactly how long the support schedule was but I thought it was about 5 years. If it's 7 then even better :-)

...

I have a friend who is actually running CentOS in a business environment. It works perfectly.

...but probably not as nice as SLES, eh?

Ah, there's a reason he uses CentOS over SLES. The company he works for will not shell out money on that Linux stuff. He installed CentOS as a way of trying to persuade them that there is life outside the MS world. He actually uses SuSE 10 Pro (retail) at home. -- ============================================== I am only human, please forgive me if I make a mistake it is not deliberate. ============================================== Xmas may be over but, PLEASE DON'T drink and drive you'll make it to the next one that way. Kevan Farmer Linux user #373362 Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR

On Thursday 30 March 2006 12:27, Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:

Makes me sick

To test and prove a point that there's life outside MS, he could have done this: SLES9 has trial download and 30 days of free updates for the same testing purposes. Therefore he could have downloaded SLES9, updated, and then show off a really cool stable Linux enterprise distro. Might have made a better impression that some unsupported amateur clone, no matter how good the copy and how skilled its makers. Even downloading Red Hat EL would have been better. I reserve my right to have a personal dislike of CentOS, based on its main goal--to be a perfect _copy_.

On Thursday 30 March 2006 10:27, Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:

Ah, so this company has no problem shelling out money for MS, but has a problem with spending on a quality Linux enterprise distro.

Go MS, you have the Money, the Power, the Marketing. When hungry, the Linux losers will just have to be content they're allowed to smell your nutritious rich farts.

Makes me sick

We charge more for M$ hosting to cover the costs of the licensing and the extra administration (virus protection etc) that's involved. If we started using EL we'd have to increase the prices for our Linux hosting to cover licenses, this would make our product less competitive. Matthew

Il giorno gio, 30/03/2006 alle 11.12 +0100, Kevanf1 ha scritto:

...

On Thursday 30 March 2006 10:27, Silviu Marin-Caea wrote: I reserve my right to have a personal dislike of CentOS, based on its main goal--to be a perfect _copy_.

I'm intrigued by Silviu's dislike of CentOS. After all, SuSE was a barely discernible clone of Slackware at one time. CentOS is a new, young distro, who know what it will look like in a few years time? I do, of course, accept that Silviu is perfectly entitled to feel this way. I don't though.

I feel i'm going a bit OT but: - RHEL is open source, so no one can blame anyone for playing with that source; - if one's interested have a look @ http://www.centos.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=122 specifically to points 8, 10, 12 of the list {with 10 being, IMHO, the most interesting for some people}; - project based on CentOS: http://www.centos.org/modules/news/index.php?storytopic=11 that IMHO is a nice plus for a distro; - firms using CentOS: http://www.centos.org/modules/news/index.php?storytopic=12 maybe one can find pros or be convinced again about the good choice using SLES. - one can think that people who will dislike a "gnome" driven SuSE will create a KDE-centric SuSE-clone. It's science fiction, i know, no one is dropping KDE, but they would be to blame ? I don't think so. -- nicola .:kOoLiNuS:. losito http://koolinus.wordpress.com http://www.koolinus.net [ITA] powered by SUSE Linux 10.0

On Thursday 30 March 2006 13:12, Kevanf1 wrote:

I'm intrigued by Silviu's dislike of CentOS. After all, SuSE was a barely discernible clone of Slackware at one time. CentOS is a new,

Ok, but I doubt that the sole purpose of SUSE was to be a perfect Slackware clone.

young distro, who know what it will look like in a few years time? I

Would you venture to think that CentOS will be far more advanced than Red Hat, contribute a lot of heavy stuff to Linux, pay salaries to Linux developers? I don't. That would mean they would have to change their main goal, to really start developing something. Then they wouldn't be CentOS anymore and I would not have anything against that. Until then I'll look down on CentOS as the LeechOS. It's robbing Red Hat of some of the fruits of their hard labour. As I have said many times, Red Hat (and SUSE) employ in paid jobs a lot of developers for stuff that matters: kernel, KDE, Gnome etc. And there's Sun that doesn't get much recognition for giving us OpenOffice.org. So, excuse me for not having just as much respect for distros that just package: Debian, Gentoo, Slackware. Which does not mean that I don't respect these at all. Only it's natural to give more credit where it's due: SUSE, Red Hat and Mandriva. Of all these, CentOS is the lowest lifeform, because it seems parasitic (on Red Hat). Some say that it's a start to convincing people that Linux is good. Well, I think there are a lot of other means: SLES9/RHEL trial downloads, SUSE Linux, Fedora, Mandriva, even Debian, Gentoo... If people install CentOS I believe they actually really need RHEL.

On Sunday 26 March 2006 11:12 pm, Harikrishnan T wrote:

On 3/24/06, Matthew Stringer wrote:

...

However given the launch of Open Suse I'm concerned that this will spell the demise of Suse Pro and thus I'll have another Fedora on my hands.

Assignment No

A SUSE Pro *ONLY* user since SUSE 5.0, I see the sad demise of SUSE since Novell has taken over. Recent rumors suggest that Gnome oriented Ximian group will set the new directions for SUSE, allegedly away from KDE, which will help only in driving even more users away.

Oh boy. Here we go again.... for the .... What 1900th time? They were toying with the idea of making SUSE ENTERPRISE Use Gome as a DEFAULT.... Meaning you would select KDE at start up and it would be right back to the way it was years ago.... Good God how does changing the default Desktop make it Gnome only? KDE is there and selectable, and you're talking about Professional, which was never enterprise. Oh and those rumors aren't recent. That was like a year ago and Novell made a public statement that they have decided not to switch over to Gnome even though it would take ONE mouse click to change it back to KDE because apparently stupidity spreads faster than an STD.

Against this background, having lost hope in the major business players, Red Hat and Novel, Debian will be the one and only choice left. If you have considered Fedora and OpenSUSE, then why not consider the original open distribution, Debian?

Maybe because Debian didn't come out for about a year AFTER Slackware? I love how people twist history. Slackware was there before Debian, And SUSE has been there longest of all, SUSE actually started by selling Slackware. Can you PLEASE keep these borderline psychotic ramblings off the list? This subject was talked to death and the SUSE team even came on to say nothing of the sort was happening. This is why I don't own a company, I have no patience for this kind of crap. Novell isn't going anywhere, nether is SUSE, use it or don't, but don't spout off CRAP that isn't true. PS: Debian needs around 2 security updates a day. Have fun keeping up.

On Tuesday 28 March 2006 9:47 am, Harikrishnan T wrote:

On 3/27/06, Allen wrote:

...

Oh boy. Here we go again.... for the .... What 1900th time?

Wait. You will have to face 190,000 more. If you are lucky.

That's the scarey part.

They were toying

...

with the idea of making SUSE ENTERPRISE Use Gome as a DEFAULT.... Meaning you would select KDE at start up and it would be right back to the way it was years ago....

You realized this now? After all these years?

After all these years? WTF are you talking about? I wasn't eh one saying KDE was gone or not useable anymore....

Good God how does changing the default Desktop make it Gnome

...

only? KDE is there and selectable,

I will select Gnome rather. After all it so simple, as use say. One click.

and you're talking about Professional,

...

which was never enterprise.

May be. But your priorities are changing. That is what the SUSEites are worried about.

Mine are changing? Don't think so.

Oh and those rumors aren't recent. That was like a year ago and Novell made

...

a public statement that they have decided not to switch over to Gnome even though it would take ONE mouse click to change it back to KDE because apparently stupidity spreads faster than an STD.

I repeat. The same applies to Gnome too. So who is stupid? We, the users, or those at Novell who want Gnome without even the one click which you advise us?

Where in the hell are you getting this from? Novell never said they were getting rid of KDE or any other desktop manager, so how would you NOT click on Gnome and hit enter?

Maybe because Debian didn't come out for about a year AFTER Slackware? I

...

love how people twist history. Slackware was there before Debian, And SUSE has been there longest of all, SUSE actually started by selling Slackware.

Ok. I was not clear enough here. I was comparing the community distros, e.gFedora, OpenSUSE and Debian. I have nothing against Slackware. It was out for a long time. But it is doesn't have a community around it, being developed by only the MAN. I am not disputing the antiquity of Slackware, but a few people do dispute the development model it follows. Anyway it is not the issue here.

Actually it does as Slackware was what SUSE started with, so it would still be on topic. And I've never heard one person complain about how Slackware is made. And being made by one person.... Whatever man. It was STARTED by one person, just like Debian was (Deb and Ian, they were married, therfore, they are one) And Linux, itself, was founded by one person, just like the FSF and Gnu, were all started by ONE person.

Can you PLEASE keep these borderline psychotic ramblings off the list? This

...

subject was talked to death and the SUSE team even came on to say nothing of the sort was happening.

Honest? SUSE heavy-weights leaving in droves, after extolling Ximian group to carry on with there new found revelations are actually stupid then?

This is why I don't own a company, I have no patience for this kind of crap.

...

Novell isn't going anywhere, nether is SUSE, use it or don't, but don't spout off CRAP that isn't true.

Maybe ok with you. But those at Novell should listen to us. I have nothing against Gnome. But when I introduce a newbies to Linux - which I am doing since the last 8 years - thorough Gnome, they start squirming. "Do we really want to stop using our old OS?" they ask. Things are better with KDE. Many people agree, many don't. That is why I choose SUSE in the first place, long back and still is hanging to it. Same with SLES. Same with Pro. It is not the question of the default desktop. It is the question of what do *you* suggest. What *you* believe in. It is that subtle suggestion that *you* makes that matters.

Well I think if you wanted to REALLY wow some newbies you wouldn't use KDE or Gnome, but Enlightenment, which makes every desktop look outdated.

I hope you got my point.

PS: Debian needs around 2 security updates a day. Have fun keeping up.

Oh! City of Munich will have a tough time.

They hired people to do this for them. and it's scriptable, not sure how my joke got taken this way, but I don't think English is your first language, so it may be how I typed it.

Bye

Tag

On Tuesday 28 March 2006 2:15 pm, SOTL wrote:

On Tuesday 28 March 2006 01:05 pm, Allen wrote:

...

On Tuesday 28 March 2006 9:47 am, Harikrishnan T wrote:

...

On 3/27/06, Allen wrote:

<Snip>

...

...

Oh and those rumors aren't recent. That was like a year ago and Novell made a public statement that they have decided not to switch over to

...

...

Gnome even though it would take ONE mouse click to change it back to KDE because apparently stupidity spreads faster than an STD.

Since when is Gnome 1 click?

It would be nice if Gnome were 1 click but that is not the case. Gnome follows the procedure of the big monopoly and everything is 2 clicks.

If you had actually read what was said.... When you log in from KDM or whatever you're using, how many clicks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie pop... Or in this case, SELECTING GNOME WITH ONE CLICK AND HITTING THE ENTER KEY. I'm assuming you were reffering to me as you slected something I said and replied to it. And again, it is one click to select Gnome OR KDE.

On Tuesday 28 March 2006 2:16 pm, Kevanf1 wrote:

On 28/03/06, Allen wrote: And Linux, itself, was founded by one person, just like the FSF and

...

Gnu, were all started by ONE person.

Strictly speaking, Linux actually refers to the kernel. I believe it was others that helped to build an operating system around that kernel after Linus released the code on the minix list.

I know, I said Linux was started by one person, I didn't say it was a complete system I said Linux itself was started by one person and it was. ... You quoted me saying GNU was started by one person, I obviously know the difference.

Just real quickly, I'm a huge fan of gentoo, so I'd pick that first, and SuSE comes up in second for me. I'm currently trying to find an angle to work gentoo into production here for us. As far as linux goes, we're primarily runnin Sles. Mike On 3/24/06, Matthew Stringer wrote:

Hi,

been having a debate at work about our new hosting platform.

Basically we offer basic dedicated linux server hosting where each user gets their own identical linux box to run web, mysql and qmail services.

The servers are managed by ourselves and we look after OS patches, security, software etc.

The platform on a whole will be centrally managed where we can PXE boot servers and role out a complete production server, role out patches and new software etc.

Nothing unusual there!

However the platform is quite large and could be running up to 1000 servers.

The debate centres on which distro to use, we can't go down the Enterprise Linux route due to costs.

Given the numbers of servers we don't want to have to upgrade the OS every 5 minutes because the distro we're using is no longer supported.

Most of our enterprise linux boxes are running Red Hat so an obvious immediate choice would be Fedora, however it seems largely a development platform for RHEL and they stop supporting old versions after 18 months which means we'd either have to upgrade all the servers to the current release (which could cause problems as upgrades do) or back port security fixes ourselves which isn't cost effective. In addition Fedora's legacy support isn't very good which runs the risks of breaking customers code.

Suse is my personal distro of choice and has support for 3 years, upgrading the OS every 3 years is obviously far less of a concern and IMO the legacy support is better.

However given the launch of Open Suse I'm concerned that this will spell the demise of Suse Pro and thus I'll have another Fedora on my hands.

Do we know if this is likely to be the case?

If so we'd probably be looking at Gentoo or Ubuntu the concerns with them are that it will introduce another flavour of Unix into our data centres (Currently have to manage Solaris, HP-UX, AS400, Suse, Suse Enterprise, Fedora, Red Hat Enterprise, Free BSD and Windows 2K & 2K3 boxes).

Thought it would be interesting to hear folks views on here.

Matthew

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

On Wednesday 22 March 2006 18:20, Jerry Feldman wrote:

BTW: I use fetchmail and kmail here and fetchmail with sylpheed claws at home - no problem.

That said, in the Kmail setup for accounts, you probably have a local host account grabbing email from /var/mail/<user name>

You could easily set up a second account, or modify the localhost account to grab email from /var/spool/amavis/tmp. Once you have all that mail, then reset the account back to normal.

Thanks Jerry I have tried that - but access is denied - 2ndly further investigation shows that each entry in /var/spool/amavis/tmp/ is a sub-directory representing one message each -- Its not the way that you say it, when you do those things to me Its more the way that you mean it, when you tell those things to me