Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

installation trouble

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Dorn Hetzel

unread,
Dec 16, 2004, 4:54:52 PM12/16/04
to

I just finished installing the current release of postfix on my
Debian 2.6.10 system. That would be postfix-2.2-20041215.
"postfix start" reports no errors, but
nothing really seems to happen and when I subsequently try
a "postfix reload" I am told postfix isn't running.

No obvious meltdowns in the log files, which do contain at least
a one liner for startup.

Any pointers on where to look next?

Regards,

-Dorn

postfix-2.2-20041215.tar.gz

Marcel Weber

unread,
Dec 16, 2004, 6:50:51 PM12/16/04
to
Dorn Hetzel schrieb:
[...]

>
> Any pointers on where to look next?
>

Hi

I'd do a "postfix check". Perhaps there is a problem with the access
rights of a file, or anything like this. Postfix check should fix this
and furthermore it should even bail if some of the configuration is bogus.

Then before any of the list-masters and postfix-gurus complain post the
output of "postconf -n" to the list. Postconf -n shows perfectly your
configuration which is most helpful for remote help!

Regards

Marcel


Dorn Hetzel

unread,
Dec 16, 2004, 9:55:46 PM12/16/04
to
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 12:49:34AM +0100, Marcel Weber wrote:
> Dorn Hetzel schrieb:
> [...]
> >
> >Any pointers on where to look next?
> >
>
> Hi
>
> I'd do a "postfix check". Perhaps there is a problem with the access
> rights of a file, or anything like this. Postfix check should fix this
> and furthermore it should even bail if some of the configuration is bogus.
>
"postfix check" terminates quietly without printing anything.

> Then before any of the list-masters and postfix-gurus complain post the
> output of "postconf -n" to the list. Postconf -n shows perfectly your
> configuration which is most helpful for remote help!
>

pls find postconf-n here...

command_directory = /usr/sbin
config_directory = /etc/postfix
daemon_directory = /usr/libexec/postfix
debug_peer_level = 2
home_mailbox = Maildir/
html_directory = /md5/postfix/html
mail_owner = postfix
mailq_path = /usr/bin/mailq
manpage_directory = /usr/local/man
mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, localhost, $mydomain
myhostname = illyria.atlanta.org
mynetworks = 172.16.0.0/16 199.250.128.0/24 199.250.129.0/24
newaliases_path = /usr/bin/newaliases
queue_directory = /md5/spool/postfix
readme_directory = /md5/postfix/readme
sample_directory = /etc/postfix
sendmail_path = /usr/sbin/sendmail
setgid_group = postdrop
unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 550

Charles Quesenberry

unread,
Dec 17, 2004, 1:15:04 AM12/17/04
to
Dorn Hetzel wrote:

>I just finished installing the current release of postfix on my
>Debian 2.6.10 system. That would be postfix-2.2-20041215.
>"postfix start" reports no errors, but
>nothing really seems to happen and when I subsequently try
>a "postfix reload" I am told postfix isn't running.
>
>No obvious meltdowns in the log files, which do contain at least
>a one liner for startup.
>

>Any pointers on where to look next?
>
>
>

What is the output of this command -
netstat -pant |grep 25

Chuck

Marcel Weber

unread,
Dec 17, 2004, 6:46:45 AM12/17/04
to
Dorn Hetzel schrieb:

>
> pls find postconf-n here...
>
> command_directory = /usr/sbin
> config_directory = /etc/postfix
> daemon_directory = /usr/libexec/postfix
> debug_peer_level = 2
> home_mailbox = Maildir/
> html_directory = /md5/postfix/html
> mail_owner = postfix
> mailq_path = /usr/bin/mailq
> manpage_directory = /usr/local/man
> mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain, localhost, $mydomain
> myhostname = illyria.atlanta.org
> mynetworks = 172.16.0.0/16 199.250.128.0/24 199.250.129.0/24
> newaliases_path = /usr/bin/newaliases
> queue_directory = /md5/spool/postfix
> readme_directory = /md5/postfix/readme
> sample_directory = /etc/postfix
> sendmail_path = /usr/sbin/sendmail
> setgid_group = postdrop
> unknown_local_recipient_reject_code = 550

Hi

Are the paths you set valid? Does the /md5 directory exist? Usually the
spool directory and so on resides in /var/spool. Furthermore check the
access rights on /md5, perhaps only root is allowed to access it.

Some other ideas to look into:

Check if postfix is running chrooted. You can check this by looking at
the /etc/postfix/master.cf:

# ==========================================================================
# service type private unpriv chroot wakeup maxproc command + args
# (yes) (yes) (yes) (never) (50)
# ==========================================================================
smtp inet n - n - - smtpd

In the above case (mine), smtp is not running in a chroot jail, which
actually is less secure but simpler to setup.

If it is set to yes, you have to make sure, that these directories are
accessable from the chroot jail.

Another possible solution might be doing a "dpkg --purge postfix" to
delete all of the postfix installation followed by "apt-get update" and
"apt-get install postfix" to reinstall it, if you haven't installed it
from source. Perhaps something messed up the installation. By Debian
2.6.10 you probably mean Sid AKA unstable. Perhaps the package or some
dependencies are messed up so checking the Debian bug pages would be a
idea too.

If you have installed it from source as it seems to me, check with "ps
ax | grep smtp" if postfix is running at all. If for any reason postfix
could not access the spool/pid directory, it couldn't write down the pid
of the processes started.

Marcel


Dorn Hetzel

unread,
Dec 18, 2004, 12:20:17 PM12/18/04
to
tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:8101 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 12531/sipstatus
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:53 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1115/named
tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:5110 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 12531/sipstatus
tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:5111 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 12531/sipstatus
tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:25 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1144/inetd
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:22 199.250.129.2:2600 ESTABLISHED 1122/sshd
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:45990 199.250.128.6:57318 ESTABLISHED 12773/java
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:45996 199.250.128.6:57317 ESTABLISHED 12880/java
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:45990 199.250.128.6:57316 ESTABLISHED 12773/java
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:57317 199.250.128.6:45996 ESTABLISHED 12749/rmiregistry
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:45985 199.250.128.6:5060 ESTABLISHED 12273/sipregistrar
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:57318 199.250.128.6:45990 ESTABLISHED 12880/java
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:57316 199.250.128.6:45990 ESTABLISHED 12749/rmiregistry
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:45984 199.250.128.6:5070 ESTABLISHED 12379/sipproxy
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:22 216.198.90.125:32771 ESTABLISHED 11654/sshd
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:5060 199.250.128.6:45985 ESTABLISHED 12379/sipproxy
tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:5070 199.250.128.6:45984 ESTABLISHED 12273/sipregistrar

-Dorn

Matt

unread,
Dec 18, 2004, 12:32:12 PM12/18/04
to
Dorn Hetzel wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 10:14:55PM -0800, Charles Quesenberry wrote:
> > Dorn Hetzel wrote:
> >
> > >I just finished installing the current release of postfix on my
> > >Debian 2.6.10 system. That would be postfix-2.2-20041215.
> > >"postfix start" reports no errors, but
> > >nothing really seems to happen and when I subsequently try
> > >a "postfix reload" I am told postfix isn't running.
> > >
> > >No obvious meltdowns in the log files, which do contain at least
> > >a one liner for startup.
> > >
> > >Any pointers on where to look next?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > What is the output of this command -
> > netstat -pant |grep 25
> >


What exactly DOES it say in your maillog, with regards to Postfix?

Matt

Keith Matthews

unread,
Dec 18, 2004, 12:37:51 PM12/18/04
to
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 12:19:04 -0500
Dorn Hetzel <pos...@dorn.hetzel.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 10:14:55PM -0800, Charles Quesenberry wrote:
> > Dorn Hetzel wrote:
> >
> > >I just finished installing the current release of postfix on my
> > >Debian 2.6.10 system. That would be postfix-2.2-20041215.
> > >"postfix start" reports no errors, but
> > >nothing really seems to happen and when I subsequently try
> > >a "postfix reload" I am told postfix isn't running.
> > >
> > >No obvious meltdowns in the log files, which do contain at least
> > >a one liner for startup.
> > >
> > >Any pointers on where to look next?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > What is the output of this command -
> > netstat -pant |grep 25
> >
>

> tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:8101 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 12531/sipstatus
> tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:53 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1115/named
> tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:5110 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 12531/sipstatus
> tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:5111 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 12531/sipstatus
> tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:25 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1144/inetd


One does not normally invoke postfix through inetd.

--
I do not reply to directly addressed mail unless it is clearly a matter that should be dealt with off-list.

Dorn Hetzel

unread,
Dec 18, 2004, 12:45:33 PM12/18/04
to

My apologies. For copies of all mail logs, see http://www.hetzel.org/postfix/

(I made clean logs and then did postfix start; postfix check; postfix stop)

-Dorn

On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 05:42:49PM +0000, Matt wrote:
> Keith Matthews wrote:
>
> > > > >No obvious meltdowns in the log files, which do contain at least
> > > > >a one liner for startup.
> > > > >
> > > > >Any pointers on where to look next?
>
>

> > One does not normally invoke postfix through inetd.
>
>

> Thats why we could do with the O.P posting the relevant parts of the
> maillog. Postfix should be putting some type of bind warning in there.
> Once again, a case of the full requested, and relevant, info not being
> supplied.
>
> Matt
>

Matt

unread,
Dec 18, 2004, 12:43:10 PM12/18/04
to

Dorn Hetzel

unread,
Dec 18, 2004, 12:48:50 PM12/18/04
to

Ok, I modified inetd.conf and commented out the smtp line.

now netstat -pant | grep ":25" is null.

-Dorn

On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 05:37:30PM +0000, Keith Matthews wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 12:19:04 -0500
> Dorn Hetzel <pos...@dorn.hetzel.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 10:14:55PM -0800, Charles Quesenberry wrote:
> > > Dorn Hetzel wrote:
> > >
> > > >I just finished installing the current release of postfix on my
> > > >Debian 2.6.10 system. That would be postfix-2.2-20041215.
> > > >"postfix start" reports no errors, but
> > > >nothing really seems to happen and when I subsequently try
> > > >a "postfix reload" I am told postfix isn't running.
> > > >

> > > >No obvious meltdowns in the log files, which do contain at least
> > > >a one liner for startup.
> > > >
> > > >Any pointers on where to look next?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >

> > > What is the output of this command -
> > > netstat -pant |grep 25
> > >
> >
> > tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:8101 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 12531/sipstatus
> > tcp 0 0 199.250.128.6:53 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1115/named
> > tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:5110 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 12531/sipstatus
> > tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:5111 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 12531/sipstatus
> > tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:25 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1144/inetd
>
>
>

> One does not normally invoke postfix through inetd.
>

Dorn Hetzel

unread,
Dec 18, 2004, 12:58:17 PM12/18/04
to
cd /;ls -l | grep md5 ...

drwxrwxrwx 9 root root 9 Dec 16 16:04 md5

ls -l md5

total 14503265
drwxr-xr-x 2 dorn hetzel 3 Dec 16 17:06 Documents
drwxr-xr-x 2 dorn hetzel 24 Dec 15 21:02 Media
drwxr-sr-x 15 sipxchan sipxchan 15 Dec 6 01:46 apache2
drwxr-xr-x 5 root root 5 Dec 13 18:05 indigo
drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4 Dec 16 16:27 postfix
drwxrwxrwx 3 root root 3 Dec 16 16:04 spool
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 14851338213 Dec 11 22:11 weather.tgz

cd /md5/spool/postfix; ls -l

total 7
drwx------ 2 postfix postfix 2 Dec 16 16:04 active
drwx------ 2 postfix postfix 2 Dec 16 16:04 bounce
drwx------ 2 postfix postfix 2 Dec 16 16:04 corrupt
drwx------ 2 postfix postfix 2 Dec 16 16:04 defer
drwx------ 2 postfix postfix 2 Dec 16 16:04 deferred
drwx------ 2 postfix postfix 2 Dec 16 16:04 flush
drwx------ 2 postfix postfix 2 Dec 16 16:04 hold
drwx------ 2 postfix postfix 2 Dec 16 16:04 incoming
drwx-wx--- 2 postfix postdrop 4 Dec 18 12:29 maildrop
drwxr-xr-x 2 postfix postfix 3 Dec 16 16:18 pid
drwx------ 2 postfix postfix 2 Dec 16 16:04 private
drwx--x--- 2 postfix postdrop 2 Dec 16 16:04 public
drwx------ 2 postfix postfix 2 Dec 16 16:04 saved
drwx------ 2 postfix postfix 2 Dec 16 16:04 trace

> Some other ideas to look into:
>
> Check if postfix is running chrooted. You can check this by looking at
> the /etc/postfix/master.cf:
>
> # ==========================================================================
> # service type private unpriv chroot wakeup maxproc command + args
> # (yes) (yes) (yes) (never) (50)
> # ==========================================================================
> smtp inet n - n - - smtpd
>

Check out http://www.hetzel.org/postfix/ to also see a copy of config files,
it appears that chroot=n.

> Another possible solution might be doing a "dpkg --purge postfix" to
> delete all of the postfix installation followed by "apt-get update" and
> "apt-get install postfix" to reinstall it, if you haven't installed it
> from source. Perhaps something messed up the installation. By Debian
> 2.6.10 you probably mean Sid AKA unstable. Perhaps the package or some
> dependencies are messed up so checking the Debian bug pages would be a
> idea too.
>

I started with woody, but both my kernel and postfix are built from
source.



> If you have installed it from source as it seems to me, check with "ps
> ax | grep smtp" if postfix is running at all. If for any reason postfix
> could not access the spool/pid directory, it couldn't write down the pid
> of the processes started.
>

Yes, it was built from source. I'm investigating permissions as I send
this mail.

Thanks again for all the help!

-Dorn

Matt

unread,
Dec 18, 2004, 1:11:22 PM12/18/04
to
Dorn Hetzel wrote:

> Yes, it was built from source. I'm investigating permissions as I send
> this mail.


postfix set-permissions

The above will check the permissions of the various files.

Matt

Dorn Hetzel

unread,
Dec 18, 2004, 1:25:02 PM12/18/04
to
On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 06:11:01PM +0000, Matt wrote:
> Dorn Hetzel wrote:
>
> > Yes, it was built from source. I'm investigating permissions as I send
> > this mail.
>
> postfix set-permissions
>
This completes without printing any messages good or bad.

subsequent series of postfix start; postfix check (prints nothing);
postfix stop (reports fatal postfix not running)...

-Dorn

Robin Lynn Frank

unread,
Dec 18, 2004, 1:59:27 PM12/18/04
to

--=-v93WNFsGYsBUA0pbjiNz
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 10:24, Dorn Hetzel wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 06:11:01PM +0000, Matt wrote:
> > Dorn Hetzel wrote:

> >=20
> > > Yes, it was built from source. I'm investigating permissions as I se=
nd
> > > this mail.
> >=20


> > postfix set-permissions
> >
> This completes without printing any messages good or bad.

>=20


> subsequent series of postfix start; postfix check (prints nothing);
> postfix stop (reports fatal postfix not running)...

>=20
> -Dorn
> =20
Odd as it sounds, I wonder if postfix-script is talking to itself. If
you execute:
whereis postfix
what does it show?

When you installed postfix was it by make install or make upgrade?

Since the postfix-script checks for the existence of necessary
directories, I am pretty sure I am wrong, but on the off chance that
there may be more than one set of directories, I figured I'd ask.=20


--=20
/"\ ASCII RIBBON Robin Lynn Frank
\ / CAMPAIGN Director of Operations
X AGAINST Paradigm-Omega, LLC
/ \ HTML MAIL http://www.paradigm-omega.com/
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Spambots visit http://paradigm-omega.net/cgi-bin/custmail.cgi
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Welcome to the USA, where Neanderthals can be elected president.

--=-v93WNFsGYsBUA0pbjiNz
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

iD8DBQBBxH31o0pgX8xyW4YRAi70AKCzvlKur/CCUyzwvwn99l9GXAWfVgCgrTMN
2JjUk/Vtto+exvO20Xk3c+U=
=PGO5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-v93WNFsGYsBUA0pbjiNz--

Dorn Hetzel

unread,
Dec 19, 2004, 10:14:24 AM12/19/04
to
On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 12:56:09PM -0800, Robin Lynn Frank wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 12:31, Dorn Hetzel wrote:

> > On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 10:59:05AM -0800, Robin Lynn Frank wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 10:24, Dorn Hetzel wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 06:11:01PM +0000, Matt wrote:
> > > > > Dorn Hetzel wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, it was built from source. I'm investigating permissions as I send
> > > > > > this mail.

> > > > >
> > > > > postfix set-permissions
> > > > >
> > > > This completes without printing any messages good or bad.
> > > >
> > > > subsequent series of postfix start; postfix check (prints nothing);
> > > > postfix stop (reports fatal postfix not running)...
> > > >
> > > > -Dorn

> > > >
> > > Odd as it sounds, I wonder if postfix-script is talking to itself. If
> > > you execute:
> > > whereis postfix
> > > what does it show?
> > >
> > #whereis postfix
> > postfix: /usr/sbin/postfix /etc/postfix /usr/libexec/postfix
> >
>
> Just on a hunch, read the instructions for /etc/postfix/post-install
> using
> less /etc/postfix/post-install Then, invoke the script with its various
> switches to see if this changes anything.
>
did that and still no obvious answer. I hacked the script to jack
several -v's onto master.

Take a look at http://www.hetzel.org/postfix/ and look at mail.info
for some additional information if you like, perhaps it might suggest
a clue...

Thanks again!

-Dorn


Wietse Venema

unread,
Dec 19, 2004, 10:56:25 AM12/19/04
to
Dorn Hetzel:

> did that and still no obvious answer. I hacked the script to jack
> several -v's onto master.
>
> Take a look at http://www.hetzel.org/postfix/ and look at mail.info
> for some additional information if you like, perhaps it might suggest
> a clue...

Run as root:

strace -o strace.out /usr/libexec/postfix/master

The information of interest is at the end.

Wietse

0 new messages