Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 18:27:20 +0100 From: Christoph Brinkhaus <c.brinkhaus@t-online.de> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Procmail Vulnerabilities check Message-ID: <20171213172720.GA2016@esprimo.local> In-Reply-To: <230a4255-839b-0ff8-9730-c86425ab3d5d@cloudzeeland.nl> References: <fb3d23c5-e32d-452a-a0c3-c3cb12340054@cloudzeeland.nl> <a66d1c33-e405-d9e8-d9c3-2738b5e66887@cloudzeeland.nl> <alpine.BSF.2.21.1712080956580.41281@wonkity.com> <230a4255-839b-0ff8-9730-c86425ab3d5d@cloudzeeland.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:35:55AM +0100, Jos Chrispijn wrote: > On 8-12-2017 17:58, Warren Block wrote: > > procmail is ancient, and has had known quality issues for much of the= =20 > > time.=A0 Consider maildrop as a more powerful and more maintained=20 > > replacement that is pretty easy to implement: > I know - but I can remember that procmail should be installed also when= =20 > using Postfix. > Might be wrong here... Dear Joe, I have replaced procmail by maildrop recently using it with Postfix. There has been just one single obstacle. I run fetchmail as suer fetchmail started with the entry in /etc/rc.conf. The mails have been delivered to Postfix which involked procmail to distribute the mail. With maildrop this did not work initially. Adding the user fetchmail to /etc/aliases with a proper alias address followed by the command newaliases fixed that. Kind regards, Christoph
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20171213172720.GA2016>