pjh@mccc.edu (Peter J. Holsberg) (05/04/91)
One of mccc.edu's leafs has an address user%hissite.UUCP@mccc.edu but smail 2.5 barfs on replying to mail from him. A couple of people have suggested that it is the % that is confusing an "*printf(address)" into thinking that the % is conversion string lead-in character, but there's no such "*printf()" in all of the source. Is there a patch for this? Thanks, Pete -- Prof. Peter J. Holsberg Mercer County Community College Voice: 609-586-4800 Engineering Technology, Computers and Math UUCP:...!princeton!mccc!pjh 1200 Old Trenton Road, Trenton, NJ 08690 Internet: pjh@mccc.edu Trenton Computer Festival -- 4/20-21/91
rsherman@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (Roby Sherman) (05/05/91)
In <1991May4.023832.2999@mccc.edu> pjh@mccc.edu (Peter J. Holsberg) writes: >One of mccc.edu's leafs has an address > user%hissite.UUCP@mccc.edu >but smail 2.5 barfs on replying to mail from him. A couple of people >have suggested that it is the % that is confusing an "*printf(address)" >into thinking that the % is conversion string lead-in character, but >there's no such "*printf()" in all of the source. I too, have problems with UUCP replies. It would be easier to FORWARD the message to this person and edit the forwarded message than do a direct reply. A better path to use would be : hissite.UUCP!user@mccc.edu Roby -- Internet : rsherman@mthvax.cs.miami.edu |-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----|-----| "You don't have to suffer to be a poet. Adolescence is enough suffering for anyone." -- John Ciardi
les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (05/06/91)
In article <1991May4.023832.2999@mccc.edu> pjh@mccc.edu (Peter J. Holsberg) writes: >One of mccc.edu's leafs has an address > user%hissite.UUCP@mccc.edu >but smail 2.5 barfs on replying to mail from him. A couple of people >have suggested that it is the % that is confusing an "*printf(address)" >into thinking that the % is conversion string lead-in character, but >there's no such "*printf()" in all of the source. Smail 2.5 doesn't understand the % as a routing operator and just treats it as the local part of the address. That is actually the correct thing to do until you hit the site where there are no other routing operators left. In this case mccc.edu has to handle it. I would suggest switching to smail3.x at least on your gateway machine since it will handle the % as well as subdomain format (if you want to allow hissite.mcc.edu) without any extra trouble. Les Mikesell les@chinet.chi.il.us
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/07/91)
In article <1991May06.141547.19963@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes: > Smail 2.5 doesn't understand the % as a routing operator and just treats > it as the local part of the address. That is actually the correct > thing to do until you hit the site where there are no other routing > operators left. In this case mccc.edu has to handle it. What I do is have lmail (which is a simple enough program, and easy to change) convert the % to an @ and feed it back through smail. No problemo. And subdomains are already handled by smail 2.5. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com +1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (05/07/91)
In article <234BBH4@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >What I do is have lmail (which is a simple enough program, and easy to change) >convert the % to an @ and feed it back through smail. No problemo. And >subdomains are already handled by smail 2.5. I thought I had seen a variety of patches go past because it didn't get it right in the case where the address to the subdomain was not routed at the source. In this case, that would mean something arriving at mccc.edu with an address of hissite.mccc.edu. It looked to me like the patches required explicit entires in the paths file too. Smail 3.x can just be told to remove the gateway domain name before a paths and/or uucp-neighbors search, so that you can automatically deliver anything with a user@machine.domain address that you could with a domain!machine or user%machine@domain or user%machine.uucp@domain address. Les Mikesell les@chinet.chi.il.us
pjh@mccc.edu (Pete Holsberg) (05/07/91)
In article <1991May06.141547.19963@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes: =In article <1991May4.023832.2999@mccc.edu> pjh@mccc.edu (Peter J. Holsberg) writes: =>One of mccc.edu's leafs has an address => user%hissite.UUCP@mccc.edu = =>but smail 2.5 barfs on replying to mail from him. A couple of people =>have suggested that it is the % that is confusing an "*printf(address)" =>into thinking that the % is conversion string lead-in character, but =>there's no such "*printf()" in all of the source. = =Smail 2.5 doesn't understand the % as a routing operator and just treats =it as the local part of the address. That is actually the correct =thing to do until you hit the site where there are no other routing =operators left. In this case mccc.edu has to handle it. I would =suggest switching to smail3.x at least on your gateway machine since ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Aw, Les -- that's a lot more work, isn't it? =it will handle the % as well as subdomain format (if you want to =allow hissite.mcc.edu) without any extra trouble. I can handle hissite.mccc.edu if it comes in a form that doesn't have the "%" -- I think! Pete -- Prof. Peter J. Holsberg Mercer County Community College Voice: 609-586-4800 Engineering Technology, Computers and Math UUCP:...!princeton!mccc!pjh 1200 Old Trenton Road, Trenton, NJ 08690 Internet: pjh@mccc.edu Trenton Computer Festival -- 4/20-21/91
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/08/91)
OK, I said: "What I do is have lmail (which is a simple enough program, and easy to change) I meant svbinmail. For reasons having to do with retaining compatibility with older mail system I front end lmail with a version of svbinmail as well. "convert the % to an @ and feed it back through smail. No problemo. And "subdomains are already handled by smail 2.5. In article <1991May07.141832.11334@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes: > I thought I had seen a variety of patches go past because it didn't get > it right in the case where the address to the subdomain was not > routed at the source. In this case, that would mean something > arriving at mccc.edu with an address of hissite.mccc.edu. Hmmm. I think this works OK. Smail 2.x just strips off the domain name if you have defs.h set up right. > It looked > to me like the patches required explicit entires in the paths file too. What sort of entries? -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (05/09/91)
In article <ZI5B1T7@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >OK, I said: >"What I do is have lmail (which is a simple enough program, and easy to change) >I meant svbinmail. For reasons having to do with retaining compatibility >with older mail system I front end lmail with a version of svbinmail as >well. Either way, to get it right you have to go through real contortions. Imagine a mailing list full of user%site's. Smail would resolve each one as local, run lmail, lmail would pass each one back to another copy of smail. Smail3 uses the same address parsing no matter where the address is obtained, and loops through alias and forward files handling all the new items the same way. [subdomains...] >Hmmm. I think this works OK. Smail 2.x just strips off the domain name if you >have defs.h set up right. Can it deal with multiple choices in the case where you want to accept me.uucp, my.domain, me.my.domain, and pass on sub.my.domain? >> It looked >> to me like the patches required explicit entires in the paths file too. >What sort of entries? I thought you had to make the entry for "sub.my.domain sub!%s" in the paths file. Smail3 allows this, but if the names coincide you can just strip off "my.domain" and it will find the existing entry for "sub". Les Mikesell les@chinet.chi.il.us
les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (05/09/91)
In article <1991May7.144508.13536@mccc.edu> pjh@mccc.edu (Pete Holsberg) writes: >=operators left. In this case mccc.edu has to handle it. I would >=suggest switching to smail3.x at least on your gateway machine since > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Aw, Les -- that's a lot more work, isn't it? It's big, but not really difficult to install if you just want the default setup. It runs out-of-the box on SysV without the usual contortions too. It has been very reliable for me - it can even restart deliveries correctly where part of a list of addresses failed due to configuration or resource errors. The only problem you might have is start-up time on a 3B2 since it is a fairly large program. On a 386 it's not bad at all. Les Mikesell les@chinet.chi.il.us
bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) (05/09/91)
In article <1991May06.141547.19963@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes: | |Smail 2.5 doesn't understand the % as a routing operator and just treats |it as the local part of the address. That is actually the correct |thing to do until you hit the site where there are no other routing |operators left. In this case mccc.edu has to handle it. I would |suggest switching to smail3.x at least on your gateway machine since |it will handle the % as well as subdomain format (if you want to |allow hissite.mcc.edu) without any extra trouble. I have a set of patches to smail 2.5, which (among other things) implements the ability to understand "%". It seems to work the way one expects. Other patches in the set allow the use of "|" in the aliases file so as to be able to mail to programs. -- ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `\o\-e UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb _< /_ "It's the death of the net as we know it (and I feel fine)" - R.A.M.
barrett@Daisy.EE.UND.AC.ZA (Alan P Barrett) (05/10/91)
In article <234BBH4@xds13.ferranti.com>, peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > In article <1991May06.141547.19963@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes: > > Smail 2.5 doesn't understand the % as a routing operator > > What I do is have lmail (which is a simple enough program, and easy to change) > convert the % to an @ and feed it back through smail. That's a good idea, and probably a lot simpler than what I did, which was to make smail2.5 understand the % character directly. (My patches to smail2.5 were posted to alt.sources early in 1991, with Archive-name: smail2.5/apbmje900117. They are in unidiff format, so you will need patch version 12u1, 12u2 or 12u3 to apply them.) --apb Alan Barrett, Dept. of Electronic Eng., Univ. of Natal, Durban, South Africa RFC822: barrett@ee.und.ac.za Bang: m2xenix!quagga!undeed!barrett
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/11/91)
In article <1991May09.150014.922@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes: > Either way, to get it right you have to go through real contortions. > Imagine a mailing list full of user%site's. Smail would resolve each > one as local, run lmail, lmail would pass each one back to another > copy of smail. True, but % is a low percentage of the traffic. Smail 2.x and domains: > Can it deal with multiple choices in the case where you want to accept > me.uucp, my.domain, me.my.domain, and pass on sub.my.domain? + uuname -l xds13 + smail -A user@xds13.uucp user + smail -A user@ferranti.com user + smail -A user@xds13.ferranti.com user + smail -A user@xds12.ferranti.com xds12!user Yep. > I thought you had to make the entry for "sub.my.domain sub!%s" in the > paths file. Yes, you need to do that. Which is right, because otherwise all my uucp neighbors are suddenly part of my domain. I don't want that... I have a specific subdomain for them for cases where some random internet site breaks all the various source-routing options, but the domain is named to indicate they're not part of ferranti: + grep xds13 /usr/lib/smail/paths # member xds13 %s 0 xds13.ferranti.com %s 0 + grep sugar /usr/lib/smail/paths # non-member sugar ris1!sugar!%s 5000 sugar.hackercorp.com ris1!sugar!%s 5000 sugar.neosoft.com ris1!sugar!%s 5000 sugar.uucp.ferranti.com ris1!sugar!%s 5000 Since the paths file is automatically generated, and the u.ficc file that I feed into pathalias is also automatically generated, this has zero cost for me. -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
pjh@mccc.edu (Pete Holsberg) (05/13/91)
In article <1991May10.010211.6081@Daisy.EE.UND.AC.ZA> barrett@Daisy.EE.UND.AC.ZA (Alan P Barrett) writes:
=(My patches
=to smail2.5 were posted to alt.sources early in 1991, with Archive-name:
=smail2.5/apbmje900117.)
=--apb
=Alan Barrett, Dept. of Electronic Eng., Univ. of Natal, Durban, South Africa
=RFC822: barrett@ee.und.ac.za Bang: m2xenix!quagga!undeed!barrett
I found Alan's patches as file 2818 on wuarchive.wustl.edu.
Pete
--
Prof. Peter J. Holsberg Mercer County Community College
Voice: 609-586-4800 Engineering Technology, Computers and Math
UUCP:...!princeton!mccc!pjh 1200 Old Trenton Road, Trenton, NJ 08690
Internet: pjh@mccc.edu Trenton Computer Festival -- 4/??-??/92jay@banzai.PCC.COM (Jay Schuster) (05/17/91)
les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes: >In article <1991May7.144508.13536@mccc.edu> pjh@mccc.edu (Pete Holsberg) writes: >>=operators left. In this case mccc.edu has to handle it. I would >>=suggest switching to smail3.x at least on your gateway machine since >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> Aw, Les -- that's a lot more work, isn't it? >It's big, but not really difficult to install if you just want the default >setup. It runs out-of-the box on SysV without the usual contortions too. >It has been very reliable for me - it can even restart deliveries correctly >where part of a list of addresses failed due to configuration or resource >errors. We run Smail3.x on two AT&T 386 boxes and an RS/6000, all on a lan, which talk to scads of client sites via uucp. Our upstream also MX's for us. Compiling smail to handle all of this was very simple. It compiled very straightforwardly. Since the sendmail that came with our 386 boxes was buggy (couldn't handle long alias lists), we didn't have much choice. I looked at IDA sendmail and decided that I'd been looking at sendmail.cf files for years and still didn't feel that I had a good grip on them. Smail-3.1 was the right choice for us. We had outgrown Smail-2.5's capabilities, and needed something that would work over an ethernet (when our vendor didn't have a uucpd, and many attempts to come up with one failed). -- Jay Schuster <jay@pcc.COM> uunet!uvm-gen!banzai!jay, attmail!banzai!jay The People's Computer Company `Revolutionary Programming'
john@cutler.uucp (John E. Babbitt Jr.) (05/22/91)
Why do people want to strip off %'s? My address is:
john%cutler.uucp@cs.orst.edu
john@cutler.uucp WOULD work, too, but best route is via cs.orst.edu,
which can best handle the above address. It seems simple to just mail
the whole john%cutler.uucp to cs.orst.edu, and not bother to hack it.
Regards,
John E. Babbitt, Jr. {UUCP: ...rutgers!ogicse!orstcs!cutler!john}
Senior Programmer/Analyst {Internet: john%cutler.uucp@cs.orst.edu}
Cutler & Company, Inc. {TDD Phone: 503/770-9014}
Medford, Oregon 97504 {Disclaimer: What I say is my personal opinion}