Help getting ezmlm-stuff configured?

Wed Apr 14 16:20:20 PDT 2004

Is it possible to get ezmlm-idx & ezmlm-web configured without drinking
(large quantities of) DJB Kool-Aid?

I've got a situation where the MTA is -- unfortunately, IMNSHO opinion
-- is qmail, and there's a moderate amount of infrastructure set up
that depends on the MTA being qmail.  :-(  At one point, I was fairly
keen on replacing it, but I now believe that the disruption would not
be worth the benefit -- qmail ought to be able to be coerced into
working well enough.  Or so I hope.

And I have a requirement to implement mailing lists in this qmail
environment, so ezmlm-idx-0.40 and ezmlm-web-2.1.3 had been installed,
but not configured.  So I'm trying to get things working prior to
a demo for next week... and I keep running into documentation that
appears to be about 4 years old, and it turns out that ezmlm-idx
is basically a set of patches on top of ezmlm, and the docs that I
do find tend to remind me of the Sidney Harris cartoon that shows
a couple of scientists (or mathematicians) in front of a board; one
has been explaining the diagrams and equations to the other (and
the astute reader sees that in the middle is written "then a miracle
occurs"), and his colleague comments  "I think you should be more
explicit in step two" -- http://www.sciencecartoonsplus.com/gallery.htm
to get the proper effect.

And I'm just not up to drinking much DJB Kool-Aid.  Not when qmail's
author writes "Every message should contain a Message-Id field"
[from the qmail-header man page] (a perspective with which I happen
to agree, at least for messages that pass from one administrative
domain to another), but when I tried sending the qmail MTA a test
message, it accepted the message, then subsequently determined the
message to be undeliverable, then tried to create a bounce-o-gram
to send back to my MTA ... but the bounce-o-gram did not *have* a
Message-ID, so my MTA rejected it.  Eh... I better stop before I get in
a foul mood.  :-(

So -- has anyone managed to do this sort of thing, emerged without
appreciable loss of sanity, and would be willing to provide a pointer or
two?

I'd appreciate it.  Replies should probably be private; I'll summarize
if there's interest.

Thanks,
david
-- 
David H. Wolfskill				david at catwhisker.org
I do not "unsubscribe" from email "services" to which I have not explicitly
subscribed.  Rather, I block spammers' access to SMTP servers I control,
and encourage others who are in a position to do so to do likewise.