Hi,
I have installed dovecot on ubuntu edgy linux by retrieving the source
debian package, building and installing the package and then building
and installing the sieve plugin.
However, I get no log messages indicating errors and as far as I can
tell, my .dovecot.sieve script is not being used.
Thank you again!
I will check out that setting. If I change the setting, does
anything else need to be done?
AB
On Mar 18, 2007, at 7:32 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 18:22 -0700, Alex Boster wrote:
Is there a way to upgrade from rc26 to rc27 without causing our POP
user
On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 18:22 -0700, Alex Boster wrote:
> Is there a way to upgrade from rc26 to rc27 without causing our POP
> users to see duplicate new mail? That was a problem last week with
> the 0.99 to 1.0rc26, and the other admin on the box is reluctant to
> upgrade again if that is go
Is there a way to upgrade from rc26 to rc27 without causing our POP
users to see duplicate new mail? That was a problem last week with
the 0.99 to 1.0rc26, and the other admin on the box is reluctant to
upgrade again if that is going to happen again...
Thanks,
AB
On Mar 18, 2007, at 6:17
Thanks -- we figured it out, but that is good to see.
Yes, it was 0.99 but has been upgraded. We are filtering out the
problematic headers and removed them from the "broken" mbox files.
Everything is working fine now.
I'm on rc26, but will go to rc27 when there is a CentOS 4 / RHEL 4
so
On 16/03/2007 19:06, Alex Boster wrote:
Does anyone have a quick recipe for how to do the filtering?
We are on CentOS 4 using a near default setup...
Does that mean dovecot 0.99? If so you ought to build or download
something more recent (ready-made latest is available from atrpms.net)
The
søn, 18.03.2007 kl. 13.26 -0700, skrev Nathan Fiedler:
> I managed to configure Dovecot to use a local OpenLDAP server to
> authenticate clients, without using SSL. However, I would rather that
> LDAP is accessed using SSL, but I cannot get Dovecot to connect. All
> that I did was change "uris"
Op zo, 18-03-2007 te 23:13 +0200, schreef Timo Sirainen:
> On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 21:58 +0100, Koen Vermeer wrote:
> >
> > A new folder with the name "joe+spam" into the virtual domains folder.
> > I
> > guess that's what you call a new user. The mail doesn't arrive in
> > joe's
> > mailbox, or any
On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 21:58 +0100, Koen Vermeer wrote:
>
> > > I have this setup like that, although without the -f and -m
> options.
> > > Anyway, it seems that postfix first tries to run deliver with
> > > $recipient=joe+spam, and deliver happily creates a new mailbox
> 'joe
> > > +spam'. Any id
Currently you need to create a wiki account to edit it, because allowing
anonymous edits brings too much spam. I wish MoinMoin supported
captchas..
On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 20:58 +, forum wrote:
> Stupid question how do i edit page.
>
>
>
> Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > BTW. All you Kerberos people
Stupid question how do i edit page.
Timo Sirainen wrote:
BTW. All you Kerberos people, please add whatever is important in
Kerberos configuration to:
http://wiki.dovecot.org/Authentication/Kerberos
I've never used Kerberos, so what I wrote to that page was what I could
figure out from dovecot
Op zo, 18-03-2007 te 17:39 +0200, schreef Timo Sirainen:
> > I have this setup like that, although without the -f and -m options.
> > Anyway, it seems that postfix first tries to run deliver with
> > $recipient=joe+spam, and deliver happily creates a new mailbox 'joe
> > +spam'. Any idea how to sol
On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 13:26 -0700, Nathan Fiedler wrote:
> Mar 18 12:53:00 server dovecot: Dovecot v1.0.rc15 starting up
> Mar 18 12:53:01 server dovecot: auth(default): ldap_bind((null)) failed:
> Can't contact LDAP server
The LDAP code was half rewritten in rc18, so you could try if a newer
ver
BTW. All you Kerberos people, please add whatever is important in
Kerberos configuration to:
http://wiki.dovecot.org/Authentication/Kerberos
I've never used Kerberos, so what I wrote to that page was what I could
figure out from dovecot-example.conf and the source code.
signature.asc
Descriptio
I managed to configure Dovecot to use a local OpenLDAP server to
authenticate clients, without using SSL. However, I would rather that
LDAP is accessed using SSL, but I cannot get Dovecot to connect. All
that I did was change "uris" to "ldaps://localhost", and this appears in
the maillog:
Mar
I did do that and the only problem was that the /etc/hosts file was not
setup properly.
Thanks lads
David McBride wrote:
forum wrote:
Mar 18 01:34:31 bandicoot dovecot: auth(default):
gssapi(?,MYIPADDRESS): While acquiring service credentials: No
principal in keytab matches desired name
Y
forum wrote:
Mar 18 01:34:31 bandicoot dovecot: auth(default): gssapi(?,MYIPADDRESS):
While acquiring service credentials: No principal in keytab matches
desired name
You need to add an imap kerberos service principal to the server's keytab file.
Cheers,
David
--
David McBride <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 19:01 +, John Robinson wrote:
> On 18/03/2007 15:51, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 01:39 +0100, Václav Haisman wrote:
> [...]
> >> uint32_t flags:8;
> >> uint32_t uid_broken:1;
> >> uint32_t expunged:1;
> >> uint32_t pseudo:1;
> >
> > Right, I didn't thin
On 18/03/2007 15:51, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 01:39 +0100, Václav Haisman wrote:
[...]
uint32_t flags:8;
uint32_t uid_broken:1;
uint32_t expunged:1;
uint32_t pseudo:1;
Right, I didn't think of that. But that feels a bit ugly :) I don't
think it saves much memory anyway, so I
+1 from me.
I think that smaller steps make testing and troubleshooting less painful.
Besides that, some features in current CVS HEAD like per-domain quotas are
really nice :-)
Láďa
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bill Boebel
Sent
We have been increasing our user count and have only run across these
errors so far (dovecot-1.0.rc27):
Mar 18 02:50:14 myhost.mydomain dovecot: pop3-login: Can't connect to auth
server at default: Connection refused
Mar 18 04:07:13 myhost.mydomain dovecot: imap-login: Can't connect to auth
serv
On Sat, March 17, 2007 10:51 pm, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Oh, and as for when the rewrite is in CVS, I'm not really sure. I'm
> still wondering if I should put it there soon and make the release after
> v1.0 be v2.0, or if I should first stabilize the current new CVS HEAD
> featur
On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 17:51 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > uint32_t flags:8;
> > uint32_t uid_broken:1;
> > uint32_t expunged:1;
> > uint32_t pseudo:1;
>
> Right, I didn't think of that. But that feels a bit ugly :) I don't
> think it saves much memory anyway, so I'll keep it as uint8_t flags.
B
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 01:39 +0100, Václav Haisman wrote:
> > uint8_t flags;
> >
> > - uint8_t uid_broken:1;
> > - uint8_t expunged:1;
> > - uint8_t pseudo:1;
> > + uint32_t uid_broken:1;
> > + uint32_t expunged:1;
> > + uint32_t pseudo:1;
> Maybe the whole chunk starting from uint
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 14:21 +, fabrizio wrote:
>
> I'm getting the same. did you solve this out?
http://wiki.dovecot.org/WhyDoesItNotWork
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Sat, 2007-03-17 at 14:33 +0100, Koen Vermeer wrote:
>
> > flags=DRhu user=virtual argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d
> ${recipient} -f ${sender} -m ${extension}
>
> I have this setup like that, although without the -f and -m options.
> Anyway, it seems that postfix first tries to run delive
On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 15:55 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
>
> UW-IMAP is even slower on EXPUNGE (factor 10 I guess, nearly on every
> operation).
>
> Dovecot with large files (2GB, e.g. new mails on the end) is really
> perfect on EXPUNGE (when there are no large holes). It takes <1s to
> EX
Hello Timo!
UW-IMAP is even slower on EXPUNGE (factor 10 I guess, nearly on every
operation).
Dovecot with large files (2GB, e.g. new mails on the end) is really
perfect on EXPUNGE (when there are no large holes). It takes <1s to
EXPUNGE.
Ciao,
Gerhard
--
http://www.wiesinger.com/
On S
On Sun, 2007-03-18 at 07:22 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
> > I've heard of load average dropping from 100 to 0.02 :)
>
> BTW, how is it that you get such great performance using mbox files?
> I
> would have thought it would be much slower than it is to delete the
> first message from say a 2 gig
Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 18.3.2007, at 7.40, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
Switching from UW-IMAP/mbox to dovecot/mbox has even a large
performance gain (I would say around 10-100, on large folders because
of the index files.). Also deleting is much faster.
I haven't benchmarked it but it is def
On 18.3.2007, at 7.40, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
Switching from UW-IMAP/mbox to dovecot/mbox has even a large
performance gain (I would say around 10-100, on large folders
because of the index files.). Also deleting is much faster.
I haven't benchmarked it but it is definitly much, much fast
31 matches
Mail list logo
