rieger@nova.laic.uucp (Bob Rieger) (03/28/89)
Does anyone have a smart mailer running on SCO XENIX? If you have any information or sources, please let me know. Please E-Mail all responses to uunet!amdahl!dlb!netcom!bobr Thanks Bob Rieger
phile@lgnp1.LS.COM (Phil Eschallier) (03/30/89)
In article <494@laic.UUCP>, rieger@nova.laic.uucp (Bob Rieger) writes: > Does anyone have a smart mailer running on SCO XENIX? If you have > any information or sources, please let me know. Please E-Mail > all responses to > > uunet!amdahl!dlb!netcom!bobr > bob, i have been running smail on xenix for some time now -- without any hassels. you can grab the files you need from here (lgnp1) via anonomous uucp ... +1 215 279 5921 (2400/1200/300 baud) ogin: nuucp word: <none> grab the files: lgnp1!/pub/files/mail/smail25.tar.Z lgnp1!/pub/files/mail/smailsco.pat.Z use that patch program available from various net sources or: lgnp1!/pub/files/utils/patch20.tar.Z then compile away and use the install_smail script (and place "set execmail" in the /usr/lib/mail/mailrc file). phil btw -- in the xenix mods for defs.h you are given the option of defining MICNET, i personally leave it undefined. -- Phil Eschallier | Lagniappe Systems (Preferred E-mail): { root | phile }@LS.COM | 1011 New Hope St. #87c or: ...!rutgers!lgnp1!{ root | phile } | Norristown, PA 19401 (alternate): phile@PRA.COM | (215) 279-1114 (8a-1p)
pmartin@ucqais.uc.edu (Paul Martin) (10/12/89)
Help! I downloaded a version of smail (2.5) and when I install the thing I get segmentation violations! Any ideas? Has anyone got this beastie to work under xenix specifically version 386 2.3.2? Any help would be appreciated. Paul Martin -- +-----------------------------+-----------------------------+ | Paul Martin | Yes I am serious, and | | pmartin@ucqais.uc.edu | don't call me Shirley. | +-----------------------------+-----------------------------+
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (10/12/89)
Are you using a 286 makefile with some -M2 option turned on? I had no trouble with mine. I have put a few hacks in, but nothing which would fix a seg violation. Here's my makefile if that helps. I don't know how hacked it is, I started it years ago on SysIII, but it ran on Xenix286 and Ultrix. ________________________________________________________________ # Makefile for smail (not a installation makefile) # @(#)Makefile 2.5 (smail) 9/15/87 CFLAGS = -O LDFLAGS = -F 4000 # # System V Release 2.0 sites can use -lmalloc for a faster malloc # #LIBS = -lmalloc OBJECTS = main.o map.o resolve.o deliver.o misc.o alias.o pw.o headers.o getpath.o str.o getopt.o all: smail svbinmail lcasep pathproc mkfnames nptx smail: $(OBJECTS) cc $(CFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS) $(OBJECTS) -o smail $(LIBS) $(OBJECTS): defs.h cc $(CFLAGS) -c $< svbinmail: svbinmail.c defs.h cc $(CFLAGS) svbinmail.c -o svbinmail lcasep: lcasep.c cc $(CFLAGS) lcasep.c -o lcasep pathproc: pathproc.sh cp pathproc.sh pathproc chmod 755 pathproc mkfnames: mkfnames.sh cp mkfnames.sh mkfnames chmod 755 mkfnames nptx: nptx.o pw.o str.o cc $(CFLAGS) nptx.o pw.o str.o -o nptx $(LIBS) nptx.o: nptx.c cc $(CFLAGS) -c nptx.c install: all @echo read doc/Install clean: rm -f *.o *.ln a.out core clobber: clean rm -f smail rmail lcasep pathproc mkfnames svbinmail nptx ________________________________________________________________ -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called 'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see that the world is flat!" - anon
bblue@toshi.cts.com (Bill Blue) (10/13/89)
In article <1833@ucqais.uc.edu> pmartin@ucqais.uc.edu (Paul Martin) writes: >I downloaded a version of smail (2.5) and when I install the thing >I get segmentation violations! Any ideas? Has anyone got this beastie >to work under xenix specifically version 386 2.3.2? Any help would be >appreciated. It's working fine here. What you need is the standard smail 2.5 distribution to which Chip Salzenberg's Xenix patches have been installed. If you don't have them available locally, send me email and I'll send you a copy. --Bill
NU013809@NDSUVM1.BITNET (Greg Wettstein) (02/08/90)
I am in the process of revamping the mail system on the XENIX box which
serves as our mail servor. I have brought up MUSH as the new mail interface
but now the transport section need work.
From what I have been able to follow on the net Smail is basically a drop
in replacement for rmail and lmail under XENIX. I knew that version 2.5 of
Smail existed and had heard of version 3.0 so I went hunting.
The only thing I can find on uunet pertaining to Smail is in Volume 11 of
comp.sources.misc. There are three compressed tar files which claim to be
Version 2.5 of Smail.
My questions are:
1: Is there Version 3.0 of Smail available or is it wandering around in
the throes of testing someplace. If Version 3.0 is available where
can it be picked up from.
2: Are there XENIX specific patches which have to applied to either
Version 2.5 or 3.0. I have heard mention of such patches but could
not locate them on uunet. Any suggestions or sources would be
appreciated.
Any information would be appreciated. I read the group avidly so responses
either to the net or e-mail would be satisfactory. Thanks in advance for
any information which may be forthcoming.
As always,
Dr. G.W. Wettstein
NU013809@NDSUVM1
`The truest mark of a man's wisdom is his ability to listen to other men
expound their wisdom.'larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) (02/11/90)
In article <3500NU013809@NDSUVM1>, NU013809@NDSUVM1.BITNET (Greg Wettstein) writes: > 1: Is there Version 3.0 of Smail available or is it wandering around in > the throes of testing someplace. If Version 3.0 is available where > can it be picked up from. I have version 3 here up and running with 386/ix. If you can't find it another place, I could place it on-line for you to pick up from the BBS. > 2: Are there XENIX specific patches which have to applied to either > Version 2.5 or 3.0. I have heard mention of such patches but could > not locate them on uunet. Any suggestions or sources would be > appreciated. The version I have has patches for Xenix. -- Larry Snyder, Northern Star Communications, Notre Dame, IN USA uucp: larry@nstar -or- ...!iuvax!ndmath!nstar!larry 4 inbound dialup high speed line public access system
NU013809@NDSUVM1.BITNET (Greg Wettstein) (02/20/90)
I received numerous resposes regarding the availability of Smail 3.0 for
XENIX. The long and short of it is that the source code is available in
what has been referred to as a controlled alpha-release.
A couple of individuals who responded indicated that Smail 3.0 is an
extremely large program and for UUCP only sites Smail 2.5 is entirely
adequate.
Before I jump into the throes of bringing 3.0 up I have decided, as long as I
have the source code here, to get Smail 2.5 running and see how it works in
this environment. I know there are XENIX specific patches required for 2.5
and I think these patches include a re-write of XENIX's execmail utility. I
would appreciate it if anyone can tell me where these patches are stored so
I can pick them up. Replies either via e-mail or to the net would be
satisfactory. Thanks in advance.
As always,
Dr. G.W. Wettstein
NU013809@NDSUVM1
`The truest mark of a man's wisdom is his ability to listen to other men
expound their wisdom.'jim@ic2020.UUCP (Jim Carter) (02/22/90)
in article <3586NU013809@NDSUVM1>, NU013809@NDSUVM1.BITNET (Greg Wettstein) says: > Before I jump into the throes of bringing 3.0 up I have decided, as long as I > have the source code here, to get Smail 2.5 running and see how it works in > this environment. > As always, > Dr. G.W. Wettstein > NU013809@NDSUVM1 I have smail 2.5 with xenix patches working quite well. If you would like the source+patches please let me know. It didn't require re-write of xenix mail rather than a replacement of xenix Mail. I do however like smail since it does some path routing for me which is very nice. -- Jim Carter (Sequoia Contact Lens,1355 11th Street,Reedley,CA,93654) {...!csufres!csuf3b!ic2020!jim} 209/638-3939, Fax 209/638-5433
bll@seer (Brad Lanam) (02/24/90)
I have smail 2.5 up and running under Xenix. This is the first I
have heard of Xenix patches. I did read one posting describing how to
install it -- you simply replace '/usr/lib/mail/execmail' with a link
to smail and be sure to put the command "set execmail" in
'/usr/lib/mail/mailrc'.
The one problem I have with it is when I send a message to multiple
off-site users (e.g. mail foo@uunet bar@ucbvax), smail creates a uux
control file that tells my link to execute the command
"rmail foo@uunet bar@ucbvax". Unfortunately, my feed's standard Xenix
rmail program cannot handle multiple addresses and bombs. The Xenix
rmail apparently cannot handle multiple "To:" addresses -- if you want
to do this you must use the "Cc:" field in the mail message itself.
Does anyone know if this is a bug in smail or a bug in the Xenix rmail
program? Also, does anyone know where smail 3.0 is archived? I tried
alphacm and got a smalltalk archive (my mail to sandy is sitting in uunet's
queue waiting for zardoz).
--
Brad Lanam ...!uunet!seeker!seer!bll bll@seer
--
Brad Lanam ...!uunet!seeker!seer!bllbob@rel.mi.org (Bob Leffler) (02/25/90)
In article <333@seer>, bll@seer (Brad Lanam) writes: > The one problem I have with it is when I send a message to multiple > off-site users (e.g. mail foo@uunet bar@ucbvax), smail creates a uux > control file that tells my link to execute the command > "rmail foo@uunet bar@ucbvax". Unfortunately, my feed's standard Xenix > rmail program cannot handle multiple addresses and bombs. The Xenix > rmail apparently cannot handle multiple "To:" addresses -- if you want > to do this you must use the "Cc:" field in the mail message itself. This isn't a bug. I don't recall the line in the smail 2.5 defs.h file, but there is a variable that will force smail to generate a uux command to each host on the command line. I don't have smail online at the moment, or I would supply the exact line. > Does anyone know if this is a bug in smail or a bug in the Xenix rmail > program? You might try asking your link to install smail, since the functionality of smail is greater than what comes with the standard Xenix mailer. I believe that the current releases of the Xenix mailer allow rmail to receive multiple addresses. If I recall, SCO supplies a new rmail with the Telebit uucico upgrade on SLS. bob -- Bob Leffler - Electronic Data Systems, GM Corporate Staffs Account 3011 West Grand Blvd., Room 9074, Detroit, MI 48202 (313) 556-4474 bob@rel.mi.org or {uunet!edsews, rutgers, sharkey}!rel!bob Opinions expressed may not be those of my employer.