[gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Grant]

I'm getting this on my laptop:

"!!! A network error occured while trying to send logmail:\n(111,
'Connection refused')\nSure you configured PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI
correctly?"

I have this in make.conf:

PORTAGE_ELOG_CLASSES="info warn error log"
PORTAGE_ELOG_SYSTEM="save mail"
PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI="myaddress@yahoo.com localhost"

and:

[ebuild   R   ] mail-mta/ssmtp-2.61  USE="mailwrapper md5sum ssl -ipv6" 0 kB

Should that be enough?

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Grant schrieb:
> I'm getting this on my laptop:
> 
> "!!! A network error occured while trying to send logmail:\n(111,
> 'Connection refused')\nSure you configured PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI
> correctly?"
> 
> I have this in make.conf:
> 
> PORTAGE_ELOG_CLASSES="info warn error log"
> PORTAGE_ELOG_SYSTEM="save mail"
> PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI="myaddress@yahoo.com localhost"
> 
> and:
> 
> [ebuild   R   ] mail-mta/ssmtp-2.61  USE="mailwrapper md5sum ssl -ipv6" 0 kB

Fine - who cares?

> Should that be enough?

Sure, if you've got an SMTP server running on localhost. Do you? ssmtp
is an MTA, not a SMTP server.

If you wish to use ssmtp with ELOG, you've got to use PORTAGE_ELOG_SYSTEM=custom
and set up your own program in PORTAGE_ELOG_COMMAND. Read my howto at
http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_Making_portage_use_/usr/sbin/sendmail_to_send_out_ELOG_mails

Alexander Skwar
-- 
For the first time we have a weapon that nobody has used for thirty years.
This gives me great hope for the human race.
		-- Harlan Ellison
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Grant]

> > I'm getting this on my laptop:
> >
> > "!!! A network error occured while trying to send logmail:\n(111,
> > 'Connection refused')\nSure you configured PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI
> > correctly?"
> >
> > I have this in make.conf:
> >
> > PORTAGE_ELOG_CLASSES="info warn error log"
> > PORTAGE_ELOG_SYSTEM="save mail"
> > PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI="myaddress@yahoo.com localhost"
> >
> > and:
> >
> > [ebuild   R   ] mail-mta/ssmtp-2.61  USE="mailwrapper md5sum ssl -ipv6" 0 kB
>
> Fine - who cares?
>
> > Should that be enough?
>
> Sure, if you've got an SMTP server running on localhost. Do you? ssmtp
> is an MTA, not a SMTP server.
>
> If you wish to use ssmtp with ELOG, you've got to use PORTAGE_ELOG_SYSTEM=custom
> and set up your own program in PORTAGE_ELOG_COMMAND. Read my howto at
> http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_Making_portage_use_/usr/sbin/sendmail_to_send_out_ELOG_mails
>
> Alexander Skwar

That looks pretty slick but I try to do things as Gentoo as possible.
Any chance of your functionality getting integrated into Portage?

Also, in place of ssmtp, would postfix alone do the trick or would I
need something like courier-imap too?

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Grant schrieb:

>> If you wish to use ssmtp with ELOG, you've got to use PORTAGE_ELOG_SYSTEM=custom
>> and set up your own program in PORTAGE_ELOG_COMMAND. Read my howto at
>> http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_Making_portage_use_/usr/sbin/sendmail_to_send_out_ELOG_mails

> That looks pretty slick but I try to do things as Gentoo as possible.

Me too - but what's "un-Gentoo" about using PORTAGE_ELOG_COMMAND?

> Any chance of your functionality getting integrated into Portage?

I don't know, but it would be a very useful addition - and IMO,
they could dump that useless feature, that portage can do SMTP
by itself. That's so un-Unix, so Windows-like :(

> Also, in place of ssmtp, would postfix alone do the trick

Yes, it would, but I'd actually not suggest to do so. Installing
postfix (or any SMTP server, for that matter) just for Portage
isn't the right way to go. It's too much code, opening too many
potential problems, which can be sidestepped by making
portage use /usr/sbin/sendmail instead.

> or would I
> need something like courier-imap too?

IMAP has nothing to do with that. IMAP is for a client to fetch
mails (kind of). It's not for sending mails.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
<Kethryvis> Gruuk: UFies are above and beyond the human race :)
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1002 bytes --]

On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:17:46 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:

> I don't know, but it would be a very useful addition - and IMO,
> they could dump that useless feature, that portage can do SMTP
> by itself. That's so un-Unix, so Windows-like :(

Portage doesn't do SMTP by itself, it uses the Python smtplib module.
Re-using existing software is very unix like

> Yes, it would, but I'd actually not suggest to do so. Installing
> postfix (or any SMTP server, for that matter) just for Portage
> isn't the right way to go. It's too much code, opening too many
> potential problems, which can be sidestepped by making
> portage use /usr/sbin/sendmail instead.

Why not let portage work with the same SMTP server you use for all other
mail? If your mail client can send mail, why not tell portage to use the
same route. There's absolutely no need to use a local MTA if you don't
already have one.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

User-friendly: (adj.) trivialized, slow, incapable, and boring.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Neil Bothwick schrieb:
> On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:17:46 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> 
>> I don't know, but it would be a very useful addition - and IMO,
>> they could dump that useless feature, that portage can do SMTP
>> by itself. That's so un-Unix, so Windows-like :(
> 
> Portage doesn't do SMTP by itself, it uses the Python smtplib module.

True.

> Re-using existing software is very unix like

Sending mail with directly speaking SMTP isn't. That's the job
of a MTA.

>> Yes, it would, but I'd actually not suggest to do so. Installing
>> postfix (or any SMTP server, for that matter) just for Portage
>> isn't the right way to go. It's too much code, opening too many
>> potential problems, which can be sidestepped by making
>> portage use /usr/sbin/sendmail instead.
> 
> Why not let portage work with the same SMTP server you use for all other
> mail?

Why make me configure SMTP in two places (MTA and Portage)?

> If your mail client can send mail, why not tell portage to use the
> same route.

Why not make Portage send mail the same way, the MUA
does it - with /usr/sbin/sendmail? That's a standard way
of getting mail off a host.

> There's absolutely no need to use a local MTA if you don't
> already have one.

There's no need to configure the same thing in multiple places.
It's really bad style to make users keep the same configuration
in multiple places.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
This isn't true in practice -- what we've missed out is Stradivarius's
constant.  And then the aside: "For those of you who don't know, that's
been called by others the fiddle factor..."
		-- From a 1B Electrical Engineering lecture.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Neil Bothwick schrieb:
> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 00:01:34 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> 
>> Neil Bothwick schrieb:
>>> > Re-using existing software is very unix like
>> 
>> Sending mail with directly speaking SMTP isn't. That's the job
>> of a MTA.
> 
> What if you don't have an MTA installed, which is how this question
> arose?

Then you install one. But a quite some services require an MTA. Not
necessarily as a dependency in the sense of ebuilds, but to make
full use of the programs - eg. cron, at and what not. If you've got
an MTA, you can then send mails from the system. And actually, an

> I have no MTA on this computer, because I run a separate mail
> server.

Those two things don't have anything to do with each other.
I've also got a seperate mail server, which I use as my smarthost.

> Talking SMTP is how all my mail-sending software communicates with
> it.

cron?

> 
>> >> Yes, it would, but I'd actually not suggest to do so. Installing
>> >> postfix (or any SMTP server, for that matter) just for Portage
>> >> isn't the right way to go. It's too much code, opening too many
>> >> potential problems, which can be sidestepped by making
>> >> portage use /usr/sbin/sendmail instead.
>> > 
>> > Why not let portage work with the same SMTP server you use for all
>> > other mail?
>> 
>> Why make me configure SMTP in two places (MTA and Portage)?
> 
> That's a separate question.

No, it's not.

> It's trivial to configure portage to use a
> local MTA if you have one.

No, it's not *trivial*. It's not hard, but trivial... No.

> If you want to use sendmail instead, why not
> submit a bug report, preferably with a patch?

PORTAGE_ELOG_COMMAND exists. I'd rather suggest to dump the
wasteful SMTP support. But I doubt that such a good suggestion
would be welcome - rather the Windows is chosen.

> But don't force all those people without an MTA to install one just
> because it's easier for you.

Well, don't force me to use SMTP, just because it's easier for you!
And also don't force me, to write "complicated" scripts, just because
it's easier for you! If portage would use the standard ways of sending
mail, ie. /usr/sbin/sendmail, than this script wouldn't be necessary.
MAYBE SMTP could be added as an *OPTION* - but I'd not add this, it's
bloat.

>> > If your mail client can send mail, why not tell portage to use the
>> > same route.
>> 
>> Why not make Portage send mail the same way, the MUA
>> does it - with /usr/sbin/sendmail?
> 
> My MUA (and that of the OP) don't use sendmail to send mail.

Which is very bad, IMO. My MUA also has this bug - annoys me
extremely, as this forces me, to setup my SMTP configuration
in multiple places. I HATE to do redundant work which adds
no benefit.

Sure, I could setup a SMTP server, no problem, but I don't want
to have any server daemons running on this system. It's a matter
of principle.

>> > There's absolutely no need to use a local MTA if you don't
>> > already have one.
>> 
>> There's no need to configure the same thing in multiple places.
>> It's really bad style to make users keep the same configuration
>> in multiple places.
> 
> How would you suggest resolving that for users without a local MTA?

Install a MTA.

> Or
> will ssmtp handle this correctly?

What "this"? With my howto, /usr/sbin/sendmail is used to send out
mail. Benefit of this is, that the "SMTP configuration" (ie. name
of (smart-)host and possibly username+password) only has to be set
at one spot - in the configuration file of the MTA. What MTA is
chosen, is basically upto the user - but Gentoo seems to prefer
ssmtp, which is totally fine and also is, what I'd suggest, as ssmtp
is so easy to configure and offer's all, that's needed.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
The average nutritional value of promises is roughly zero.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3558 bytes --]

On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 14:27:22 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:

> >> Sending mail with directly speaking SMTP isn't. That's the job
> >> of a MTA.
> > 
> > What if you don't have an MTA installed, which is how this question
> > arose?
> 
> Then you install one.

That's not an acceptable answer for a core system service. Portage
should, and can, be able to do its job using the standard Python mail
transport methods. 

> > Talking SMTP is how all my mail-sending software communicates with
> > it.
> 
> cron?

Fair comment, I forgot about that one, which uses ssmtp. In my defence,
our month-old grandson stayed with us last night - sleep-deprivation is a
b*******!

> >> > Why not let portage work with the same SMTP server you use for all
> >> > other mail?
> >> 
> >> Why make me configure SMTP in two places (MTA and Portage)?
> > 
> > That's a separate question.
> 
> No, it's not.

It is, but it doesn't matter.You should not be "made" to configure mail
in two places if you have an MTA, I never disagreed with that. But
equally, you should not be forced to install an MTA.

> > It's trivial to configure portage to use a
> > local MTA if you have one.
> 
> No, it's not *trivial*. It's not hard, but trivial... No.

Uncommenting the relevant line and changing the email address to your own
seems trivial to me. It may not be trivial to a SUSE user, but no Gentoo
user should have trouble entering their mail address in a config file.

> > If you want to use sendmail instead, why not
> > submit a bug report, preferably with a patch?
> 
> PORTAGE_ELOG_COMMAND exists. I'd rather suggest to dump the
> wasteful SMTP support. But I doubt that such a good suggestion
> would be welcome - rather the Windows is chosen.

It's not wasteful, as it provides an easy option for many people and it
uses existing software. Look at the code and you'll see that all it does
is parse the address etc. from the config file and use it to send the
message via an smtplib function. Using sendmail would require about the
same amount of code, giving a choice of the two would only add a couple
of lines, which should suit everyone.

> > But don't force all those people without an MTA to install one just
> > because it's easier for you.
> 
> Well, don't force me to use SMTP, just because it's easier for you!

I'm not, I didn't write portage!

> And also don't force me, to write "complicated" scripts, just because
> it's easier for you!

It's easier for me because it's there and it works.

> If portage would use the standard ways of sending
> mail, ie. /usr/sbin/sendmail, than this script wouldn't be necessary.
> MAYBE SMTP could be added as an *OPTION* - but I'd not add this, it's
> bloat.

It's not bloat, because the code is already there.

> > Or
> > will ssmtp handle this correctly?
> 
> What "this"?

Sending mail from portage as per the OP's question.

> With my howto, /usr/sbin/sendmail is used to send out
> mail. Benefit of this is, that the "SMTP configuration" (ie. name
> of (smart-)host and possibly username+password) only has to be set
> at one spot - in the configuration file of the MTA. What MTA is
> chosen, is basically upto the user - but Gentoo seems to prefer
> ssmtp, which is totally fine and also is, what I'd suggest, as ssmtp
> is so easy to configure and offer's all, that's needed.

As I said, file a request on bugzilla. It sounds a reasonable option.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

To poldly bow air mobius gumby four: Trek on novocaine.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Neil Bothwick schrieb:
> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 14:27:22 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> 
>> >> Sending mail with directly speaking SMTP isn't. That's the job
>> >> of a MTA.
>> > 
>> > What if you don't have an MTA installed, which is how this question
>> > arose?
>> 
>> Then you install one.
> 
> That's not an acceptable answer for a core system service.

Yes, it is, as sending out mail isn't a core system service.

> Portage
> should, and can, be able to do its job using the standard Python mail
> transport methods. 

Portage can only send out mail after a network connection has been
setup. Thus, we're already after the "core system setup". Finally,
system software like some cron daemons (eg. fcron) already depend
on an MTA (although I don't quite understand, why fcron depends on
an MTA and vixie-cron doesn't. This doesn't make sense to me.).

>> > Talking SMTP is how all my mail-sending software communicates with
>> > it.
>> 
>> cron?
> 
> Fair comment, I forgot about that one, which uses ssmtp.

No, it doesn't use ssmtp, it uses /usr/sbin/sendmail.

Now, ssmtp provides this "interface", that's of course true. But
cron works equally well, if the ssmtp MTA is replaced by, say, postfix.

> In my defence,
> our month-old grandson stayed with us last night - sleep-deprivation is a
> b*******!

;) Tell me about it. It's so freaking hot in Germany lately, that
it's hard to find sleep (at least for me it is hard).

>> >> > Why not let portage work with the same SMTP server you use for all
>> >> > other mail?
>> >> 
>> >> Why make me configure SMTP in two places (MTA and Portage)?
>> > 
>> > That's a separate question.
>> 
>> No, it's not.
> 
> It is, but it doesn't matter.You should not be "made" to configure mail
> in two places if you have an MTA, I never disagreed with that. But
> equally, you should not be forced to install an MTA.

But you aren't forced - by default, portage doesn't even send out
mails. The user has to configure this.

But it would actually be *very* easy to make this a default, if
the IMO stupid dependency on SMTP would be dumped. If it were,
it could always use /usr/sbin/sendmail to send mails to, lets
say, portage@localhost and the user could then set up an alias
to get the mail to the wanted place. No *NEED* to configure the
recipient address in make.conf anymore.

Now, if there isn't a (working) /usr/sbin/sendmail, then
no mail is sent out. Just like it's now right after install.
But as soon as standard methods (/usr/sbin/sendmail) become
available, portage mails "just work".

>> > It's trivial to configure portage to use a
>> > local MTA if you have one.
>> 
>> No, it's not *trivial*. It's not hard, but trivial... No.
> 
> Uncommenting the relevant line and changing the email address to your own
> seems trivial to me.

That's not quite true. Eg. if you've got a username with an @, you're
in trouble, see <https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116984>.

This could be circumvented (or shifted to another place) by dumping
the use of SMTP.

>> > If you want to use sendmail instead, why not
>> > submit a bug report, preferably with a patch?
>> 
>> PORTAGE_ELOG_COMMAND exists. I'd rather suggest to dump the
>> wasteful SMTP support. But I doubt that such a good suggestion
>> would be welcome - rather the Windows is chosen.
> 
> It's not wasteful, as it provides an easy option for many people and it
> uses existing software.

It IS wasteful, as it doesn't use existing, standard software and
as it re-implements a functionality, which is very likely to be
present already.

> Look at the code and you'll see that all it does
> is parse the address etc. from the config file and use it to send the
> message via an smtplib function.  Using sendmail would require about the
> same amount of code, giving a choice of the two would only add a couple
> of lines, which should suit everyone.

Here some lines, there some lines. That's how waste and bloat
is made. This bloat and waste can be circumvented, by using
standard tools.

>> > But don't force all those people without an MTA to install one just
>> > because it's easier for you.
>> 
>> Well, don't force me to use SMTP, just because it's easier for you!
> 
> I'm not, I didn't write portage!

That's lame :) I don't force you to do anything either, for the
exact same reason.

>> And also don't force me, to write "complicated" scripts, just because
>> it's easier for you!
> 
> It's easier for me because it's there and it works.

It's harder for me and many other people, as an MTA will very likely
be present.

So, don't force me to do something, just because it's easier for you!

>> If portage would use the standard ways of sending
>> mail, ie. /usr/sbin/sendmail, than this script wouldn't be necessary.
>> MAYBE SMTP could be added as an *OPTION* - but I'd not add this, it's
>> bloat.
> 
> It's not bloat, because the code is already there.

It is bloat, as the same function is handled by a seperate, and
more standard implementation. Function := Get mail off the system with
SMTP.

>> > Or
>> > will ssmtp handle this correctly?
>> 
>> What "this"?
> 
> Sending mail from portage as per the OP's question.

No, SSMTP doesn't do this, as Portage doesn't use standard
Unix ways to send out mail, because Portage only can do
SMTP and not use /usr/sbin/sendmail. The OP wanted to talk to
localhost - ssmtp isn't a SMTP server, and thus doesn't listen
on localhost.

>> With my howto, /usr/sbin/sendmail is used to send out
>> mail. Benefit of this is, that the "SMTP configuration" (ie. name
>> of (smart-)host and possibly username+password) only has to be set
>> at one spot - in the configuration file of the MTA. What MTA is
>> chosen, is basically upto the user - but Gentoo seems to prefer
>> ssmtp, which is totally fine and also is, what I'd suggest, as ssmtp
>> is so easy to configure and offer's all, that's needed.
> 
> As I said, file a request on bugzilla. It sounds a reasonable option.

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=141513

Alexander Skwar
-- 
"I am ... a woman ... and ... technically a parasitic uterine growth"
		-- Sean Doran the Younger [allegedly]
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 768 bytes --]

On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 21:02:36 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:

> > It's not wasteful, as it provides an easy option for many people and
> > it uses existing software.
> 
> It IS wasteful, as it doesn't use existing, standard software and
> as it re-implements a functionality, which is very likely to be
> present already.

Except that Python's smtplib is existing, standard software.

The rest of the discussion is moot as neither of us had read
make.,conf.example carefully enough until now :(


-- 
Neil Bothwick

This signature project was my last, best hope to seem eloquent. It failed.
But in the year of Decency In Communications Act, it became something
greater. My last, best hope for satire. The year is 1997. The Place:
Babbling On Pine.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 21:02:36 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> 
>> > It's not wasteful, as it provides an easy option for many people and
>> > it uses existing software.
>> 
>> It IS wasteful, as it doesn't use existing, standard software and
>> as it re-implements a functionality, which is very likely to be
>> present already.
> 
> Except that Python's smtplib is existing, standard software.

Well, but so is /usr/sbin/sendmail.

> The rest of the discussion is moot as neither of us had read
> make.,conf.example carefully enough until now :(

Yep - a shame, isn't it? ;) Such a long thread, without covering the
bases.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Small is beautiful.
		-- Schumacher's Dictum
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Grant schrieb:
> I'm getting this on my laptop:
> 
> "!!! A network error occured while trying to send logmail:\n(111,
> 'Connection refused')\nSure you configured PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI
> correctly?"
> 
> I have this in make.conf:
> 
> PORTAGE_ELOG_CLASSES="info warn error log"
> PORTAGE_ELOG_SYSTEM="save mail"
> PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI="myaddress@yahoo.com localhost"

Now, it would help, if *ALL* of us (which foremost includes ME!) would
read the documentation ;) In this case, make.conf.example:

# PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI: this variable holds all important settings for the mail
#                       module. In most cases listing the recipient address and
#                       the receiving mailserver should be sufficient, but you can
#                       also use advanced settings like authentication or TLS. The
#                       full syntax is:
#                           address [[user:passwd@]mailserver[:port]]
#                       where
#                           address:    recipient address
#                           user:       username for smtp auth (defaults to none)
#                           passwd:     password for smtp auth (defaults to none)
#                           mailserver: smtp server that should be used to deliver the mail (defaults to localhost)
#                                       alternatively this can also be a the path to a sendmail binary if you don't want to use smtp
#                           port:       port to use on the given smtp server (defaults to 25, values > 100000 indicate that starttls should be used on (port-100000))

Of interest is the following:

#                           mailserver: smtp server that should be used to deliver the mail (defaults to localhost)
#                                       alternatively this can also be a the path to a sendmail binary if you don't want to use smtp

So, the correct entry for your make.conf is:

PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI="myaddress@yahoo.com /usr/sbin/sendmail"

Sorry for all the confusion - I should've read the documentation first.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
"I'd love to go out with you, but I have to floss my cat."
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Grant]

> So, the correct entry for your make.conf is:
>
> PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI="myaddress@yahoo.com /usr/sbin/sendmail"

I've tried that and it doesn't seem to be working.  I have ssmtp
installed with +mailwrapper.  Do I need to set up any other kind of
configuration?

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Grant wrote:
>> So, the correct entry for your make.conf is:
>>
>> PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI="myaddress@yahoo.com /usr/sbin/sendmail"
> 
> I've tried that and it doesn't seem to be working. 

How is it not working? What's in the logs?

> I have ssmtp
> installed with +mailwrapper.

mailwrapper or not shouldn't matter.

>  Do I need to set up any other kind of
> configuration?

You need to configure ssmtp. Did you do so?

Alexander Skwar
-- 
The easiest way to get the root password is to become system admin.
	-- Unknown source
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Grant]

> >> So, the correct entry for your make.conf is:
> >>
> >> PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI="myaddress@yahoo.com /usr/sbin/sendmail"
> >
> > I've tried that and it doesn't seem to be working.
>
> How is it not working? What's in the logs?

There is nothing in /var/log/mail/ and I can't find anything in
/var/log/everything/.

> > I have ssmtp
> > installed with +mailwrapper.
>
> mailwrapper or not shouldn't matter.

Ok, for some reason I thought mailwrapper provided the sendmail binary.

> >  Do I need to set up any other kind of
> > configuration?
>
> You need to configure ssmtp. Did you do so?

Looking over /etc/ssmtp/ssmtp.conf, it seems like I need to configure
the mailhub variable?  I want to make sure I'm setting up as simple a
system for getting this elog mail out as possible.  Do I need to
specify some kind of an SMTP server to get it sent?  I thought this
thread was saying using SMTP was optional.  I'm pretty confused.

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1107 bytes --]

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 09:52:04 -0700, Grant wrote:

> > You need to configure ssmtp. Did you do so?
> 
> Looking over /etc/ssmtp/ssmtp.conf, it seems like I need to configure
> the mailhub variable?  I want to make sure I'm setting up as simple a
> system for getting this elog mail out as possible.  Do I need to
> specify some kind of an SMTP server to get it sent?  I thought this
> thread was saying using SMTP was optional.  I'm pretty confused.

It will always use SMTP, the only difference is whether portage handles
the SMTP itself or passes the work over to sendmail.

ssmtp is only a gateway, not a true MTA. All it does is pass the mail
onto a real MTA for processing, this is the mailhub specified in the
config file. The alternative is to specify your ISP's mail server
directory in make.conf, but, as Alexander argued, this means you have to
configure SMTP separately for each program that uses it, although it is
slightly simpler.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Q. How does Batman's wife call him for dinner?
A. Dinner dinner dinner dinner dinner dinner dinner dinner - Batman!

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Grant schrieb:
>> >> So, the correct entry for your make.conf is:
>> >>
>> >> PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILURI="myaddress@yahoo.com /usr/sbin/sendmail"
>> >
>> > I've tried that and it doesn't seem to be working.
>>
>> How is it not working? What's in the logs?
> 
> There is nothing in /var/log/mail/ and I can't find anything in
> /var/log/everything/.

Hm, I would've checked /var/log/syslog and /var/log/debug.

What happens when you try to send a mail with mutt/mail/mailx?

mail -s "test mail" myaddress@yahoo.com < /dev/null

There have to be some messages somewhere.

>> > I have ssmtp
>> > installed with +mailwrapper.
>>
>> mailwrapper or not shouldn't matter.
> 
> Ok, for some reason I thought mailwrapper provided the sendmail binary.

No, it doesn't. Check out the description of mailwrapper.

> 
>> >  Do I need to set up any other kind of
>> > configuration?
>>
>> You need to configure ssmtp. Did you do so?
> 
> Looking over /etc/ssmtp/ssmtp.conf, it seems like I need to configure
> the mailhub variable?

Yep.

>  I want to make sure I'm setting up as simple a
> system for getting this elog mail out as possible.  Do I need to
> specify some kind of an SMTP server to get it sent?

Yes. Some "mailhub", as the documentation likes to call it. And
if you need to authenticate yourself to the SMTP server, set
AuthUser and AuthPass. Also

# Use SSL/TLS to send secure messages to server.
UseTLS=YES

is quite useful.

>  I thought this
> thread was saying using SMTP was optional.

You misunderstood. This thread was about, *WHERE* SMTP is used.
IMO, it's wrong that portage even CAN use SMTP. But nearly always,
you'll need to use some SMTP server to get your mail out. But
with the /usr/sbin/sendmail interface, it's conceivable to send
out the mail WITHOUT the use of SMTP (eg. if the mail is sent from
the host with UUCP).


Alexander Skwar
-- 
Is a wedding successful if it comes off without a hitch?
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Grant]

> >  I thought this
> > thread was saying using SMTP was optional.
>
> You misunderstood. This thread was about, *WHERE* SMTP is used.
> IMO, it's wrong that portage even CAN use SMTP. But nearly always,
> you'll need to use some SMTP server to get your mail out. But
> with the /usr/sbin/sendmail interface, it's conceivable to send
> out the mail WITHOUT the use of SMTP (eg. if the mail is sent from
> the host with UUCP).

Can I set my portage elog mail to be sent with UUCP?  Is it not
recommended for any reason?  I have postfix set up on my remote
server, but I like keeping personal and business stuff separate.

- Grant
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Grant schrieb:
>> >  I thought this
>> > thread was saying using SMTP was optional.
>>
>> You misunderstood. This thread was about, *WHERE* SMTP is used.
>> IMO, it's wrong that portage even CAN use SMTP. But nearly always,
>> you'll need to use some SMTP server to get your mail out. But
>> with the /usr/sbin/sendmail interface, it's conceivable to send
>> out the mail WITHOUT the use of SMTP (eg. if the mail is sent from
>> the host with UUCP).
> 
> Can I set my portage elog mail to be sent with UUCP?

Yes, by employing a sending program, which can do UUCP. /usr/sbin/sendmail
could be such a programm.

>  Is it not
> recommended for any reason?

Pardon?

>  I have postfix set up on my remote
> server, but I like keeping personal and business stuff separate.

Fine.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Bones: "The man's DEAD, Jim!"
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1079 bytes --]

On Tuesday 25 July 2006 19:42, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Grant schrieb:
> >> >  I thought this
> >> > thread was saying using SMTP was optional.
> >>
> >> You misunderstood. This thread was about, *WHERE* SMTP is used.
> >> IMO, it's wrong that portage even CAN use SMTP. But nearly always,
> >> you'll need to use some SMTP server to get your mail out. But
> >> with the /usr/sbin/sendmail interface, it's conceivable to send
> >> out the mail WITHOUT the use of SMTP (eg. if the mail is sent from
> >> the host with UUCP).
> >
> > Can I set my portage elog mail to be sent with UUCP?
>
> Yes, by employing a sending program, which can do UUCP. /usr/sbin/sendmail
> could be such a programm.

Is there some way of sending such messages to a local MUA without them leaving 
the box?  If I understand this correctly in all options discussed here the 
messages will leave the box via SMTP/UUCP, reach the ISP servers, then the 
relevant (e.g. mail.yahoo.com) mailserver and finally back to the local box 
as incoming mail on the user MUA.
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Mick schrieb:
> On Tuesday 25 July 2006 19:42, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> Grant schrieb:
>> >> >  I thought this
>> >> > thread was saying using SMTP was optional.
>> >>
>> >> You misunderstood. This thread was about, *WHERE* SMTP is used.
>> >> IMO, it's wrong that portage even CAN use SMTP. But nearly always,
>> >> you'll need to use some SMTP server to get your mail out. But
>> >> with the /usr/sbin/sendmail interface, it's conceivable to send
>> >> out the mail WITHOUT the use of SMTP (eg. if the mail is sent from
>> >> the host with UUCP).
>> >
>> > Can I set my portage elog mail to be sent with UUCP?
>>
>> Yes, by employing a sending program, which can do UUCP. /usr/sbin/sendmail
>> could be such a programm.
> 
> Is there some way of sending such messages to a local MUA without them leaving 
> the box?

How's the MUA accessing the mailbox? Is it /var/spool/mail/$username?

Anyway, the answer is: Yes. Use /usr/sbin/sendmail as the "mailserver"
in you MAILURI.

You cannot use SSMTP as your MTA (/usr/sbin/sendmail), though. You might
want to check out esmtp, as it can do local delivery by using an MDA like
procmail. With esmtp, such a scenario would be possible.

>  If I understand this correctly in all options discussed here the 
> messages will leave the box via SMTP/UUCP, reach the ISP servers, then the 
> relevant (e.g. mail.yahoo.com) mailserver and finally back to the local box 
> as incoming mail on the user MUA.

That's probably the flow which can be found most often, yes. But it's
not necessary to be that way.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Have an adequate day.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>  I thought this
> >> thread was saying using SMTP was optional.
> Can I set my portage elog mail to be sent with UUCP?  Is it not
oh, someone's still using good-old uucp ? :)



cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Tro]

On Monday July 24 2006 01:51, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Sorry for all the confusion - I should've read the documentation first.

So, is that gentoo-wiki article defunct now?

Tro
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Tro schrieb:
> On Monday July 24 2006 01:51, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> Sorry for all the confusion - I should've read the documentation first.
> 
> So, is that gentoo-wiki article defunct now?

I can't tell yet, as I haven't checked if MAILURI="... /usr/sbin/sendmail"
works fine. But I'd suppose, that it's obsolete, yes. Such a shame, such
a nice article, and all for nothing ;)

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Armor's Axiom:
	Virtue is the failure to achieve vice.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1428 bytes --]

On Monday 24 July 2006 19:08, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Tro schrieb:
> > On Monday July 24 2006 01:51, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> >> Sorry for all the confusion - I should've read the documentation first.
> >
> > So, is that gentoo-wiki article defunct now?
>
> I can't tell yet, as I haven't checked if MAILURI="... /usr/sbin/sendmail"
> works fine. But I'd suppose, that it's obsolete, yes. Such a shame, such
> a nice article, and all for nothing ;)

I for one don't think that the article or the thread here is for nothing.  The 
thread was entertaining and educational.  I haven't yet set up my system to 
mail me anything.  This is because I use PORT_LOGDIR=/var/log/portage and 
check the logs, and/or I use enotice.  In any case, I could probably do with 
a mail system to warn me of all sort of things but I am not yet sure what is 
the best (more streamlined and efficient) way of setting it up.

If you top this with my lack of understanding of the basic/advanced 
architecture and components of a mail system then you see why I enjoyed 
reading both your wiki article and this thread.  The wiki article may be 
obsolete, but you can always update it to explain various options (that's 
what Gentoo is about), different configurations, pros & cons, etc.  I know 
that it all takes time, but if you find it I and many more will surely be 
grateful for your contribution.  :)
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Peter Ruskin]

On Monday 24 July 2006 20:25, Mick wrote:
> On Monday 24 July 2006 19:08, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> > Tro schrieb:
> > > On Monday July 24 2006 01:51, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> > >> Sorry for all the confusion - I should've read the
> > >> documentation first.
> > >
> > > So, is that gentoo-wiki article defunct now?
> >
> > I can't tell yet, as I haven't checked if MAILURI="...
> > /usr/sbin/sendmail" works fine. But I'd suppose, that it's
> > obsolete, yes. Such a shame, such a nice article, and all for
> > nothing ;)
>
> I for one don't think that the article or the thread here is for
> nothing.  The thread was entertaining and educational.  I haven't
> yet set up my system to mail me anything.  This is because I use
> PORT_LOGDIR=/var/log/portage and check the logs, and/or I use
> enotice.  In any case, I could probably do with a mail system to
> warn me of all sort of things but I am not yet sure what is the
> best (more streamlined and efficient) way of setting it up.
>
> If you top this with my lack of understanding of the
> basic/advanced architecture and components of a mail system then
> you see why I enjoyed reading both your wiki article and this
> thread.  The wiki article may be obsolete, but you can always
> update it to explain various options (that's what Gentoo is
> about), different configurations, pros & cons, etc.  I know that
> it all takes time, but if you find it I and many more will surely
> be grateful for your contribution.  :)

Well, I for one appreciated the article.  I use postfix anyway 
(which provides my sendmail) and I have this in make.conf:

PORTAGE_ELOG_CLASSES="info warn error log"
PORTAGE_ELOG_SYSTEM="save custom"
PORTAGE_ELOG_COMMAND="/usr/local/bin/portage-elog-command.sh 
peter@mesh portage '\${PACKAGE}' '\${LOGFILE}'"
PORTAGE_ELOG_MAILSUBJECT="package \${PACKAGE} merged on \${HOST} 
with notice"

I always have kmail open (Kontact) and I am enjoying seeing all the 
messages that emerge generates, as they happen ... something I've 
missed for years.

-- 
Peter
========================================================================
Gentoo Linux: Portage 2.1-r1.		kernel-2.6.17-gentoo-r3-x86.
2006 i686 AMD Athlon(tm) 64.		gcc(GCC): 3.4.4.
KDE: 3.5.3.				Qt: 3.3.6.
========================================================================
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Alexander Skwar]

Alexander Skwar schrieb:
> Tro schrieb:
>> On Monday July 24 2006 01:51, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>>> Sorry for all the confusion - I should've read the documentation first.
>> 
>> So, is that gentoo-wiki article defunct now?
> 
> I can't tell yet, as I haven't checked if MAILURI="... /usr/sbin/sendmail"
> works fine.

Yes, it works fine. Thus, the howto is obsolete now.

But thanks for letting me know, that it was useful to some of you!

Alexander Skwar
-- 
My brother sent me a postcard the other day with this big satellite photo
of the entire earth on it. On the back it said: "Wish you were here".
		-- Steven Wright
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list