Viewing profile — schmonz
schmonz
HN member- Joined
- Sun, Jun 09, 2013, 8:50 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 100
- Public activity
- 29 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About schmonz
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/schmonz; my proof: https://keybase.io/schmonz/sigs/UZlFbgoFkn_Famx1wCU1xLncjAzbrrKrzIt_GtOEMNU ]
aspe:keyoxide.org:PAC6KHICU3QSHQZVPJCZFS7KIA
Recent public activity
- story
- story
-
comment
Comment #39878318
The NetBSD Project is pleased to announce NetBSD 10.0, the eighteenth major release of the NetBSD operating system. It represents cumulative improvements to the operating system si…
- story
-
comment
Comment #23252694
We’ve released notqmail 1.08, addressing these vulnerabilities (among other things). HN discussion thread for the 1.08 release: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23252421
- story
-
comment
Comment #20778415
I haven't experienced a need for more granular restrictions. Can you give an example of a problem it would solve?
-
comment
Comment #20762465
You wanna write a new MTA from scratch? Me neither :-p
-
comment
Comment #20762095
P.S. On the acceptutils page, check out the POP3 hole I found :-)
-
comment
Comment #20762071
Vanilla qmail was never an open relay unless you really intended to configure it as one. It's just that the only relay controls were IP-based. Back in the day, before AUTH was wide…
-
comment
Comment #20761973
Thank you!
-
comment
Comment #20758835
Sorry, we think it's rested plenty long enough :-) You've given some excellent examples of how qmail got this way, and what notqmail needs to change to be viable. I have my own run…
-
comment
Comment #20758767
Yep, after reading the post I'm not any less impressed by (or interested in) Rust. If the post's claim were "Wait until Rust changes more slowly before investing more heavily in it…
-
comment
Comment #20757214
For the moment, we're targeting sysadmins who already run qmail (or netqmail). Much later, when we begin to approach feature parity with Postfix, notqmail might start being an inte…
-
comment
Comment #20757204
It will be a lot of work, no question about that. Fortunately none of it will be about Maildir, as folks like you have long since ironed out all those issues (thanks!). It's possib…
-
comment
Comment #20757134
Yes, and while I haven't run s/qmail myself, I have sometimes borrowed (and then usually refactored) some of his code, and have frequently collaborated with him on improving ucspi-…
-
comment
Comment #20757107
People can put whatever they want in their own .qmail files. That doesn't affect anything unless qmail believes those .qmail files are relevant to what it's delivering. A user cont…
-
comment
Comment #20757041
Yes, for a long time it's been the case that to run qmail you have to really really want to run qmail. That's why I put so much effort for so many years into cross-platform package…
-
comment
Comment #20753815
They can’t, unless qmail has been configured to know they control mail for domain.tld. The admin configuration mechanism for this (control/virtualdomains) is simple and powerful.
-
comment
Comment #20753235
Hey dude! Been a little while. Hope you’re well. If we were starting from scratch, I’d be first to say let’s pick something safer than C. But we’re starting from where DJB left off…
-
comment
Comment #20557807
Extensibility is [an explicit goal]( https://github.com/notqmail/notqmail/wiki#goals ), for reasons such as these. If we introduce some more small interfaces -- 1998 qmail was alre…
-
comment
Comment #20554496
Yes, exactly right. One other PR left to merge, then we'll update the docs and cut 1.07.
-
comment
Comment #20554469
"This implementation" is notqmail, which none of the netqmail people are involved in. netqmail 1.06, which none of us notqmail people were involved in, was produced by a handful of…
- story
-
comment
Comment #11953658
Writing Ikiwiki plugins is often very easy, because triggers for most events you'd want to get involved in are available, and because much of Ikiwiki's own functionality is impleme…