Timo Sirainen said the following on 16/6/2007 0:50:
Jun 12 11:28:00 mail dovecot: imap-login: Login: user=,
method=PLAIN, rip=10.10.10.103, lip=10.10.10.254
Jun 12 11:53:59 mail dovecot: IMAP(nadia):
inotify_add_watch(/var/spool/mail/nadia/new) failed: No such file or
directory
> Is /var/spo
I am using Dovecot-1.0-0_27.rc10.e14.
And when try to login with outlook there is an error
saying "You server did not respond do u want to try again in 60 seconds"
Any solutions please help
regards
Waheed
On 2007-06-16, 01:36, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> OK, attached is the next one. I actually found one missing error handler
> from there. Doesn't matter if you keep the previous patch or not.
Here's the first one:
Jun 17 00:34:50 smtp1 deliver([EMAIL PROTECTED]): copy: mailbox_save_finish()
failed
Jun
Tere.
%c expands to "secured" or empty. So you could use eg.
passdb pam {
args = %s%c
}
and create imap, imapsecured, pop3, pop3secured
More better, so for example user1 can access only imaps, using Yous
suggestion, I have to list all users, except user1 in imap, pop3,
pop3secured.
But i
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 23:14 +0200, Lucas -LandM- wrote:
> Hi Timo,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] sbin]# ./dovecot --version
> 1.0.rc22
>
> Do you recommend an update ?
That shouldn't contain any bad bugs. Do you use quota?
Could you strace the process while it's hanging (for a few seconds) and
send m
Hi Timo,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] sbin]# ./dovecot --version
1.0.rc22
Do you recommend an update ?
Lucas
Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 14:04 +0200, Lucas -LandM- wrote:
Hi Charles,
RedHat 4.0, Maildir, 3 Gb. of volume, and about 6k msgs.
Never finish the build task,
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 14:04 +0200, Lucas -LandM- wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
> RedHat 4.0, Maildir, 3 Gb. of volume, and about 6k msgs.
> Never finish the build task, could I force to exec the process for this
> user?
6000 messages isn't hardly anything. You didn't mention your Dovecot
version. If
On 2007-06-16, 01:36, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> OK, attached is the next one. I actually found one missing error
> handler from there. Doesn't matter if you keep the previous patch
> or not.
Thanks. Will add it, and keep you updated.
> > I'm also getting some "timeout while waiting for lock", and wi
A Dissabte 16 Juny 2007 16:10, Jon Slater va escriure:
> Hi,
>
> I’ve posted this before but no one was able to help. I can’t figure
> out what they are trying to do, and if I should be concerned.
> I am running dovecot version 0.99.14 on Fedora Core 4. It appears
> that my dovecot server is und
In the x86 world you'll get SIGILL if you try to run Pentium M compiled
code on a 586 platform, or SSE/MMX enabled code on a CPU which does not
support these extended instruction sets.
I don't know about PPCs, though.
I've read about such troubles on the PPC, but it looks like you have to
s
Am Samstag, 16. Juni 2007 schrieb Benton Haynes:
> > As you're getting SIGILL, have you verified that your dovecot (and
> > all libraries it depends on) has been compiled for the right target
> > CPU?
> As far as I can tell, yes.
> ac_cv_build=powerpc-apple-darwin8.9.0
Ah, you're on PPC, ok...
As you're getting SIGILL, have you verified that your dovecot (and all
libraries it depends on) has been compiled for the right target CPU?
Greetings,
Gunter
As far as I can tell, yes.
Checking in the DOVECOT build's config.log
ac_cv_build=powerpc-apple-darwin8.9.0
ac_cv_host=powerpc-app
Tere.
Does anyone know what this is? Or someone I could ask?
Normal dictionary attack?
--
Mart
Hi Jon,
I cannot help with the specific question, but in my opinion, your first
and primary goal should be to get that server updated to 1.0.1 asap...
0.99.x is no longer supported - and *very* dated...
Jon Slater wrote:
Hi,
I’ve posted this before but no one was able to help. I can’t
Hi,
I’ve posted this before but no one was able to help. I can’t figure out
what they are trying to do, and if I should be concerned.
I am running dovecot version 0.99.14 on Fedora Core 4. It appears that my
dovecot server is under attack. This morning in my system e-mail I saw
this:
Hi Ralf,
It would be great, but we have an LDAP+exim as backend, and searching
in documentation doen´t seem so easy :(
Is posible to call index directly instead as a part of delivery?
Thank you,
Lucas
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Lucas -LandM- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi,
First of all
Hi Charles,
RedHat 4.0, Maildir, 3 Gb. of volume, and about 6k msgs.
Never finish the build task, could I force to exec the process for this
user?
Thank you,
Lucas
Charles Marcus wrote:
First of all congratulations for you development. It´s really good. We
have a customer that has a c
Tere.
http://wiki.dovecot.org/Authentication/RestrictAccess
Thisone - authrequiredpam_listfile.so item=user sense=allow
file=/etc/imapusers onerr=fail
Ok, that is close, but how to allow some users use only imaps and not
imap? Same question about pops/pop also. Or is it possible
First of all congratulations for you development. It´s really good.
We have a customer that has a copy of all inbound and outbound mail
in an account. When he tries to open the mail, the process of index
all mail consume all cpu and memory. How can we avoid this kinds of
things?
OS? How many m
* Lucas -LandM- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hi,
>
>First of all congratulations for you development. It´s really good.
> We have a customer that has a copy of all inbound and outbound mail in
> an account. When he tries to open the mail, the process of index all
> mail consume all cpu and me
Hi,
First of all congratulations for you development. It´s really good.
We have a customer that has a copy of all inbound and outbound mail in
an account. When he tries to open the mail, the process of index all
mail consume all cpu and memory. How can we avoid this kinds of things?
Th
Works fine... seamless upgrade with no issues. Managesieve patch applied
fine no config issues or anything...
timo++
Keep up the great work...
--
Andraž "ruskie" Levstik
Source Mage GNU/Linux Games grimoire guru
Geek/Hacker/Tinker
Hacker FAQ: http://www.plethora.net/%7eseebs/faqs/hacker.html
Be
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 11:28 +0300, Mart Pirita wrote:
> I'd like to use something like this:
>
> exclude_using_pop = user1, user2, @group
> exclude_using_pops = user1, user2, @group
> exclude_using_imap = user1, user2, @group
> exclude_using_imaps = user1, user2, @group
http://wiki.dovecot.org/Au
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 10:26 +0200, Daniel wrote:
> But please tell me why can't I update my mercurial repository to
> 1.0.1.
hg pull
hg up
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Hello.
Tried search, no luck, sorry, if this is already answered, but I'm still
looking a solution using pam_auth how to define in dovecot which user
can access which protocol, for example, default is:
protocols = pop3 pop3s imap imaps
I'd like to use something like this:
exclude_using_pop
2007. June 15., Timo Sirainen:
> http://dovecot.org/releases/dovecot-1.0.1.tar.gz
> http://dovecot.org/releases/dovecot-1.0.1.tar.gz.sig
>
> Lots of small fixes.
>
Great, great! Good work, thanks! 1.0 was ultra stable here.
But please tell me why can't I update my mercurial repository to 1.0.1.
$
26 matches
Mail list logo
