On 10/24/2012 3:04 PM, Robert JR wrote:
> I have a question regarding mailbox locking and hope any one can help me
> to better understanding the locking of mbox
>
> My Postfix lock option is fcntl dotlock
> mailbox_delivery_lock = fcntl, dotlock
> virtual_mailbox_lock = fcntl, dotlock
>
> My Dov
On 10/24/2012 9:45 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2012-10-24 10:01 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> If the box is truly unresponsive, i.e. hard locked, then the corrupted
>> indexes are only a symptom of the underlying problem, which is unrelated
>> to Dovecot, UNLESS, the lack of responsiveness was du
Currently I have dovecot working with Active Directory authentication and
public folders with acl. In acl I have the users I want to access the public
folders. It'll be easier for me to use one group instead of 50 users but I
can't get it to work. From where does dovecot get the "group" attribut
Am 24.10.2012 22:04, schrieb Bill Shirley:
>
> On 10/24/2012 2:24 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
>> Am 24.10.2012 19:21, schrieb Bill Shirley:
>>> Admittedly, I have not used amavisd-new or LMTP; they may be better.
>>> But will they allow spamassassin per-user prefs? Performance is a plus;
>>> anot
On Wed, 24 Oct 2012 11:32:55 -0500
/dev/rob0 wrote:
> There seems to be much confusion in this thread. I might be able to
> help clear up some of it, but probably not all, because I agree with
> Robert about using amavisd-new for filtering and LMTP for delivery.
>
Thanks for the reality check
Thanks for the input Jack.
As I am using debian, the location to edit the ulimit is
/etc/default/dovecot. There is no effect even after changing this value.
I tried putting the value in the /etc/init.d/dovecot script without success.
Fasil.
On 10/18/2012 05:13 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
I'm using R
Hello,
I have a question regarding mailbox locking and hope any one can help
me to better understanding the locking of mbox
My Postfix lock option is fcntl dotlock
mailbox_delivery_lock = fcntl, dotlock
virtual_mailbox_lock = fcntl, dotlock
My Dovecot lock option is fcntl only
mbox_write_lock
On 10/24/2012 2:32 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 24.10.2012 20:25, schrieb /dev/rob0:
Regarding Robert's "flame" comment in the other subthread, I agree
with you; I saw no flame. And I did not suggest that you were not
trying to help
take my sorry, as non native english, perhaps i missused "
On 10/24/2012 2:24 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 24.10.2012 19:21, schrieb Bill Shirley:
Admittedly, I have not used amavisd-new or LMTP; they may be better.
But will they allow spamassassin per-user prefs? Performance is a plus;
another daemon is not. That saying, I'll run another daemon if
On 10/24/2012 2:25 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 02:04:39PM -0400, Bill Shirley wrote:
On 10/24/2012 1:39 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 01:28:41PM -0400, Bill Shirley wrote:
On 10/24/2012 12:32 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 02:52:45PM -0600, Troy
On 2012-10-24 12:16 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 24.10.2012 16:45, schrieb Charles Marcus:
On 2012-10-24 10:01 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
If the box is truly unresponsive, i.e. hard locked, then the corrupted
indexes are only a symptom of the underlying problem, which is unrelated
to Dovecot
Am 24.10.2012 20:25, schrieb /dev/rob0:
> Regarding Robert's "flame" comment in the other subthread, I agree
> with you; I saw no flame. And I did not suggest that you were not
> trying to help
take my sorry, as non native english, perhaps i missused "flame" here
Best Regards
MfG Robert Schet
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 02:04:39PM -0400, Bill Shirley wrote:
> On 10/24/2012 1:39 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 01:28:41PM -0400, Bill Shirley wrote:
> >>On 10/24/2012 12:32 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 02:52:45PM -0600, Troy Vitullo wrote:
> >snip
> post
Am 24.10.2012 19:21, schrieb Bill Shirley:
> Admittedly, I have not used amavisd-new or LMTP; they may be better.
> But will they allow spamassassin per-user prefs? Performance is a plus;
> another daemon is not. That saying, I'll run another daemon if I get
> something out of it. Any benchmarks
Dear Bob
Thankx for your hint. I tried with jxplorer to connect to the AD ldap and I
am pretty sure that I will get it up and running like I did with the
openldap server.
Carsten
-Original Message-
From: dovecot-boun...@dovecot.org [mailto:dovecot-boun...@dovecot.org] On
Behalf Of Bob Mi
On 10/24/2012 1:39 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 01:28:41PM -0400, Bill Shirley wrote:
On 10/24/2012 12:32 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
There seems to be much confusion in this thread. I might be able
able to help clear up some of it, but probably not all, because I
agree with Robert ab
On 10/24/2012 1:37 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 24.10.2012 18:28, schrieb Bill Shirley:
I don't understand why you strongly recommend against using the
mailbox_command. Is there a security risk here?
no ,until you dont have made any setup failures...
your right there are tons of working p
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 01:21:58PM -0400, Bill Shirley wrote:
> On 10/24/2012 12:44 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> >I can't speak for Robert, but as I said in the other post I
> >agree with him, so I will say why. You will get better overall
> >performance with amavisd-new and LMTP, rather than invoking a
I've now upgraded dovecot from 2.0.21 to 2.1.10 and the good news is I no
longer see dovecot crashing when loading the snarf plugin however snarf
still does not do anything except make the inbox disappear.
I've come to the conclusion that either snarf does not actually work,
possible, but I doubt
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 01:28:41PM -0400, Bill Shirley wrote:
> On 10/24/2012 12:32 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> >There seems to be much confusion in this thread. I might be able
> >able to help clear up some of it, but probably not all, because I
> >agree with Robert about using amavisd-new for filteri
Am 24.10.2012 18:28, schrieb Bill Shirley:
> I don't understand why you strongly recommend against using the
> mailbox_command. Is there a security risk here?
no ,until you dont have made any setup failures...
your right there are tons of working possible setups
your free to configure as you lik
On 10/24/2012 12:32 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
There seems to be much confusion in this thread. I might be able to
help clear up some of it, but probably not all, because I agree with
Robert about using amavisd-new for filtering and LMTP for delivery.
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 02:52:45PM -0600, Troy Vi
On 10/24/2012 12:44 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:28:48PM -0400, Bill Shirley wrote:
I don't understand why you strongly recommend against using the
mailbox_command. Is there a security risk here?
One issue is that mailbox_command is only used for local(8) delivery.
You brou
On 10/24/2012 12:10 PM, Troy Vitullo wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:32:59 -0400
Bill Shirley wrote:
On 10/23/2012 9:06 PM, Bill Shirley wrote:
What is your mailbox_command in main.cf? I just use:
mailbox_command = /usr/bin/spamc -u "$USER" -e
/usr/lib64/dovecot/deliver -a "$RECIPIENT" -f "$
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:28:48PM -0400, Bill Shirley wrote:
> I don't understand why you strongly recommend against using the
> mailbox_command. Is there a security risk here?
One issue is that mailbox_command is only used for local(8) delivery.
You brought that up for the OP, who is reporting
There seems to be much confusion in this thread. I might be able to
help clear up some of it, but probably not all, because I agree with
Robert about using amavisd-new for filtering and LMTP for delivery.
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 02:52:45PM -0600, Troy Vitullo wrote:
> My server uses a system com
On 10/24/2012 12:09 PM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 24.10.2012 17:47, schrieb Bill Shirley:
On 10/24/2012 2:33 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 24.10.2012 03:32, schrieb Bill Shirley:
What is your mailbox_command in main.cf? I just use:
mailbox_command = /usr/bin/spamc -u "$USER" -e
/usr/lib6
Am 24.10.2012 16:45, schrieb Charles Marcus:
> On 2012-10-24 10:01 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> If the box is truly unresponsive, i.e. hard locked, then the corrupted
>> indexes are only a symptom of the underlying problem, which is unrelated
>> to Dovecot, UNLESS, the lack of responsiveness was du
On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:32:59 -0400
Bill Shirley wrote:
> On 10/23/2012 9:06 PM, Bill Shirley wrote:
> >
> >
> > What is your mailbox_command in main.cf? I just use:
> > mailbox_command = /usr/bin/spamc -u "$USER" -e
> > /usr/lib64/dovecot/deliver -a "$RECIPIENT" -f "$SENDER" -m
> > "$EXTENSION"
Am 24.10.2012 17:47, schrieb Bill Shirley:
>
> On 10/24/2012 2:33 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
>> Am 24.10.2012 03:32, schrieb Bill Shirley:
>>> What is your mailbox_command in main.cf? I just use:
>>> mailbox_command = /usr/bin/spamc -u "$USER" -e
>>> /usr/lib64/dovecot/deliver -a "$RECIPIENT" -
I don't have it in production yet because there are other things I am
still trying to add to samba4, but my test server has dovecot
authenticating against samba4. Without openchange or any other
non-native mechanism.
Dovecot supports authenticating against ldap, the settings are in your
auth-ld
On 10/24/2012 2:33 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 24.10.2012 03:32, schrieb Bill Shirley:
What is your mailbox_command in main.cf? I just use:
mailbox_command = /usr/bin/spamc -u "$USER" -e
/usr/lib64/dovecot/deliver -a "$RECIPIENT" -f "$SENDER" -m "$EXTENSION"
I don't need anything in maste
Hello Stephan,
sorry for this late reply.
On 10/19/2012 01:01 AM, Stephan Bosch wrote:
On 10/15/2012 9:40 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
Hi Stephan,
thanks a lot for your reply.
On 10/11/2012 10:35 PM, Stephan Bosch wrote:
On 10/10/2012 11:23 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
Hello,
we're scouting if it's poss
Hi,
I've got some trouble here..
i created some sieve rules, but the debug log says that there is a
invalid mailbox name
error: msgid=<*>: failed to store into mailbox
'/home/shared/.automail.Bugtracker/': Invalid mailbox name.
~/.dovecot.sieve
if address :is "to" "mantis-admin@<*>"
{
On 2012-10-24 10:01 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
If the box is truly unresponsive, i.e. hard locked, then the corrupted
indexes are only a symptom of the underlying problem, which is unrelated
to Dovecot, UNLESS, the lack of responsiveness was due to massive disk
access, which will occur when rebuil
On 10/24/2012 6:28 AM, Milan Holzäpfel wrote:
> I have a problem with an incosistent mdbox:
...
> four hours after the problem initially appeared, I did a hard reset of
> the system because it was unresponsive.
...
> Can anybody say something about this? May the mdbox be repaired?
If the box is
Am 24.10.2012 13:28, schrieb Milan Holzäpfel:
> The whole mdbox is 6.6 GiB large and I guess that it contains about
> 300k-600k messages. It's an archive of public mailing lists, so I could
> give access to the files.
>
> Can anybody say something about this? May the mdbox be repaired?
perhaps
Hello all,
I have a problem with an incosistent mdbox:
Oct 24 10:43:23 two dovecot: imap-login: Login: user=<...>, method=PLAIN,
rip=..., lip=..., mpid=4977, TLS
Oct 24 10:43:23 two dovecot: imap(lis...@mjh.name): Error: mdbox map
.../mdbox/storage/dovecot.map.index corrupted: Unexpectedly lo
Hi group
I am currently running a mail server on ubuntu 11.04 with postfix 2.8.5,
dovecot dovecot 2.0.13 and openldap 2.4.23. I have now read about sogo and
I am thinking about installing it because of it's native outlook support
capabilities.
The ZEG appliance wouldn't be an option for me becaus
39 matches
Mail list logo
