[Gllug] Sendmail + SuSE 7.3

[Dave Cridland]

On Sat, 2002-03-16 at 19:07, Mike Brodbelt wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-03-15 at 09:41, Dave Cridland wrote:
> > On Fri, 2002-03-15 at 00:12, Mike Brodbelt wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2002-03-14 at 23:34, Dave Cridland wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2002-03-14 at 12:39, an unknown sender wrote:
> > > > > I get is kellyh@ also SuSE had an article on their website telling me
> > > > > all I had to do was edit /etc/mail/genericstable, and then makemap...
> > > > > 
> > > > > What am I missing?
> > > > 
> > > > I suggest taking a stock /etc/sendmail.cf, and editing it quickly.
> > > 
> > > This is unspeakably *evil*.
> > > 
> > > Do not edit your sendmail.cf if it's at all possible to avoid. Eric
> > > Allman has been quoted as saying that sendmail.cf should be treated as a
> > > binary file. It's far easier to generate it from the mc file. To add
> > > genericstable support to your sendmail configuration, you only need one
> > > line on an mc file:-
> > 
> > Personally, I find it easier to edit the cf file by far. :-)
> 
> Up to a point, perhaps. When you change version of sendmail it's far
> easier to get moving quickly again if you kept an mc file though - you
> can just regenerate your cf for the new version.

True, but equally sendmail's configuration is versioned separately, so
newer sendmails can understand older configuration files - an extremely
nice piece of design, I think.

> > 
> > Then again, I find that some of the features don't do what I need a lot
> > of the time anyway, on those occasions when I need to tamper with the cf
> > at all. virtusertable springs to mind, for instance - I tend to rework
> > that a fair amount for plenty of cases.
> 
> What do you change?

Well, given a virtusertable source of:

user1 at domain1.com	user1-dm1
user2 at domain1.com	user2-dm1
user1 at domain2.com	user1-dm2

Then both domain1.com and domain2.com need to be in class w. That alone
is okay, but means that sending email to user1-dm1 at domain2.com ends up
in a mailbox belonging to a user from domain1.com - not what you want
with ISP-level stuff.

Adding in a catchall so that unhandled email ends up at either a
specific mailbox, or alternatively, a specific mailbox that doesn't
exist, works, but in the latter case is a kludge of extreme proportions,
and gives you mucky error messages.

I prefer to replace that with a different map which checks a different
class of domains. In ruleset 0, I check to see if we're looking at one
of those virtual domains, and if so, whether we have a user at domain
match. If not, I look to see if we have a catch-all domain match. If
not, and here's the significant difference - I throw a no such user
error.

I find that keeping the virtual domains separate from the real domains
works better for me.

And, of course, it's unspeakably evil. Which is nice.

Dave.


-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug