similar to: OP/PSA: Net Systems Research mail port diddlers

Actually the reverse pointer doesn't have to match. In fact this is impossible if you are setting up virtual accounts on one server for different domains. You just need to have a reverse pointer. Most email servers look to seen if the reverse pointer has a "dyn" in it and blocks those. ? Original Message ? From: build+dovecot at de-korte.org Sent: October 26, 2020 2:02 AM

since years mutt, 'cause it really sucks. I tried TB or claws, evolution, opera but always returned to mutt. Am 18. November 2016 06:31:43 MEZ, schrieb Steve Litt <slitt at troubleshooters.com>: >On Thu, 17 Nov 2016 18:07:15 -0800 >lists at lazygranch.com wrote: > >> FWIW, I use claws, which is about the only one not mentioned.? >> >> I don't like

you should ask your ip provider to set a proper reverse lookup for you. If I would get a lot of spam from upcloud.host ips, I would also consider blocking upcloud.host reverse dns lookups. If it is your ip, it is an easy request to have it changed. -----Original Message----- From: Sami Ketola [mailto:sami at ketola.io] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 11:22 AM To: lists Cc: Arjen de Korte;

Look up "roundcube", really straight forward configuration, once installed type in the IP of your server publishing it on a web browser and it will walk you through configuring it On 18 Nov 2016 07:16, <lists at lazygranch.com> wrote: > So does mutt suck or not? > > Original Message > From: Andreas Kalex > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 11:06 PM > To:

* lists at lazygranch.com <lists at lazygranch.com>: > So does mutt suck or not? If you work with vi and like it, chances are you will also like mutt. Personally I *love* mutt! No extra fat. Always on the spot. It is "liberal in what it receives and conservative in how it sends". Since it is command line program, I can run it almost everywhere. It supports local mailboxes,

FWIW, I use claws, which is about the only one not mentioned.? I don't like Thunderbird. For one thing, it is in caretaker status. Mozilla believes Web based mail is the "future." I rather not run roundcube, given I got hacked via an unpatched roundcube ?back when I was using a hosting company. ? Webmail just increases your attack surface.?

Hello The page https://networkupstools.org/ddl/Liebert/PSA_1500.html don't contain all information about UPS series PSA. First, the variable "*device.serial*" is dummy, it is always empty , and "*ups.serial*" also always empty. Second, configuration file for the all UPS "PSA" contain these lines: [PSA] ??? driver = "usbhid-ups" ?? ?port =

Likely because 2.6.3 is not a current release. 2.7.2 (or 3?) is rhe current version, and it makes little sense to backport changes. Nut is a trivial compile . . . 'Use the source, Luke . . .' - Tim On October 17, 2014 6:05:35 PM CDT, Derek Harding <derek at lagham.org.uk> wrote: >Hi, > >Back in 2011, it was reported that Liebert PSA devices persist in >reporting OB

[FAQ on USB-connected UPSes] > Remember: this is brand new *experimental* software and is probably > very broken. Do us a favor and report successes or failures to > the mailing lists. No problem ... : UPS: Liebert PowerSure PSA 500 NUT: Version 2.0.2 Kernel: 2.6.11.5, with CONFIG_USB_HID, CONFIG_USB_HIDINPUT, and CONFIG_USB_HIDDEV compiled in (statically)

Hi, Back in 2011, it was reported that Liebert PSA devices persist in reporting OB (On Battery) when using usbhid-ups regardless of the actual state. Pier Paolo did some work (2011) which reportedly solved the issue. However, that doesn't seem to have reached mainstream and I now face the same problem. I'm using NUT 2.6.3 with a new Liebert PSA 1500Va that only ever reports OB and

Anyone have any advice what I need to do next? Regards, Paul. -----Original Message----- From: Nut-upsuser [mailto:nut-upsuser-bounces+paul=smithp.co.uk at lists.alioth.debian.org] On Behalf Of Charles Lepple Sent: 02 August 2013 11:36 To: nut-upsuser list Subject: [Nut-upsuser] Fwd: Liebert PSA UPS problem. Begin forwarded message: > From: "Paul Smith" > Subject: Liebert PSA

This patch adds support for the following ups to liebert-hid.c: $ lsusb | grep Liebert Bus 007 Device 005: ID 10af:0001 Liebert Corp. PowerSure PSA UPS Using this patch, I'm able to obtain information about the ups via upsc: $ upsc upsname battery.charge: 100 battery.runtime: 1012 battery.type: PbAc battery.voltage: 1172 battery.voltage.nominal: 12 driver.name: usbhid-ups

Hi all, This is just a PSA that as of r302752, 3 parallel algorithms (for_each, for_each_n, and sort) are available in llvm/Support/Parallel.h. Effort was made to match the C++ Parallelism TS N4507 [ http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/n4507.pdf] as closely as possible, but some aspects were intentionally omitted. No support is added for the executor proposal N4406 [

I guess it's kind of a natural response on my part, working professionally in software. T-Shooting step one: Get current and see if the problem persists. If it does,then step rwo: debug. 2+ years is forever in software, noting that 2.6.3 was mid 2012 . . . - Tim On October 17, 2014 9:38:15 PM CDT, Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com> wrote: >On Oct 17, 2014, at 8:31 PM, Tim Dawson

Begin forwarded message: > From: "Paul Smith" > Subject: Liebert PSA UPS problem. > Date: July 31, 2013 4:42:33 PM EDT > To: <nut-upsuser at lists.alioth.debian.org> > > Hi all, > A brief summary: > > I have a new Liebert PSA UPS which I wanted to help support my FreeNAS box (a FreeBSD 8 variant). Unfortunately the nut-ups implementation here for

Hi all, several bots are currently experiencing an svn tree conflict when updating Updating '.': Skipped 'utils/lit/lit/llvm' -- Node remains in conflict Skipped 'utils/lit/lit/llvm' -- Node remains in conflict U utils/lit/lit/TestRunner.py U utils/lit/lit/util.py U test/lit.cfg U test/lit.site.cfg.in U cmake/modules/AddLLVM.cmake Updated to revision 313467. Summary of

Jochen Bern wrote: > > Peter Selinger wrote: > > have you been able to get your Liebert UPS to work? If I am correct, > > it should work with the newhidups Belkin subdriver. Could you please > > post your results? I am curious to know if this works or doesn't - and > > if yes, we should add permanent support for Liebert into NUT. > > I'm sorry, but

This is the last post in the old thread: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/nut-upsuser/2011-February/006651.html I'm marginally reluctant to install a non-standard release on a customer server because I may not be the next person to have to work on it, however, I do agree the most recent is usually the first port-of-call. Since it seems the fix didn't get followed through,

I downloaded latest source and it compiles ok but the original usbhid-ups.c is unchanged. Pier changed other files, too, and I don't know the changes needed. Simply substituting the modified (as per 2011) usbhid-ups gives a failed connection to the ups. So I have tried a little. I'll uninstall 2.6.3 and try to install 2.7.2 from a fresh compile. Thanks for the responses so far :-) --

Hi all, There's a good chance that the people who most need to see this won't see it, but here goes anyway. Google is currently dropping a _lot_ of the mail we attempt to deliver to lists.fd.o subscribers. The immediate cause is sending on mail from domains with SPF/DKIM/DMARC policies which explicitly specify that lists.fd.o cannot relay mail on their behalf. Every time we do that, not