Hi,
We’re using dovecot 1.0.7, which seems to be the latest version available on
CentOS 5.
Downloading emails are dead slow. Really small emails goes quickly, but normal
emails and emails with attachments are so slow to download it’s almost
ridiculous. I’ve googled some and found that it could
On 10/27/2013 1:21 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Bottom line desire is to avoid scraping/hijacking email stored on my
dovecot server by any client other than a users client.
I don't think IMAP has a "client identification" component in its
protocol, at least one that's in widespread and "compatib
On 10/22/2013 3:22 PM, Noel Butler wrote:
But I agree with you on the rest, since of those 500K IP's Marc claims
to have I'd bet that 99% are hijacked innocent pc's/servers, and of
them, >75% would likely be a one time usage.
This accords with our own statistics. While it IS tempting to treat
On 9/26/2013 7:47 AM, Patricio Rojo wrote:
* /home partition nfs mounted from a remote firewalled QNAP NAS server
(TS-869U-RP), which also serves other machines (RAID-5 setup with
currently no bad disks).
I assume this NAS properly implements various locking services?
Dovecot, like most mail
On 9/24/2013 2:28 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> maybe on your server, my logs showing the opposite and since
> the "smtp" are outgoing messages your conclusion of "nobody"
> is strange
>
> cat maillog | grep smtp | grep -v smtpd | grep TLS | wc -l
> 12327
>
> cat maillog | grep smtpd | grep TLS | w
On 4/5/2013 11:36 PM, Jim Pazarena wrote:
> I have just come to the realization that password encryption using the
> crypt function in linux, ONLY USES THE FIRST 8 CHARS. I have written
> routines using crypt allowing 16+ chars, and find that anything past 8
> is ignored. Wow.
>
> Is there a wa
On 3/20/2013 6:35 AM, dormitionsk...@hotmail.com wrote:
Well, like I said, we have real slow upload speeds. I think POP3 would give a
better user experience.
About the only connectivity situation where POP3 might make for a better
"user experience" is one of intermittent bursty sort that's
On 11/11/2012 5:26 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Have you made systematic tests? I.e. compared times for all of these
> with those from the different dovecot backends.
The choice of Dovecot backends made no substantial difference. I used maildir,
sdbox, and mdbox. I also added SiS (with
Obvious caveats and qualifications apply here throughout this email.
Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> I see... well I haven't tested AOX or dbmail so far (especially as
> they're not in Debian and I was too lazy till now to compile them)...
>
> At least I had the impression that performance (es
On 8/9/2012 11:26 PM, Luigi Rosa wrote:
I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.
It sounds like "push" was really implemented as a poll.
=R=
On 7/15/2012 2:14 AM, Ed W wrote:
>
Interestingly, there doesn't seem to be so much difference between
iterated sha-512 (sha512crypt) and bcrypt. Based on looking at latest
john the ripper results (although I'm a bit confused because they don't
seem to quote the baseline results using the normal
On 6/23/2012 3:27 PM, Mailing List SVR wrote:
I looked at the code and there was no relevant change from dovecot
2.0.13 and dovecot 2.0.19, upgrading between ubuntu releases updated
openssl too and this could be the problem,
however is not clear to me while imap over ssl works fine with
thunderd
Putting XFS on a singe RAID1 pair, as you seem to be describing above
for the multiple "thin" node case, and hitting one node with parallel
writes to multiple user mail dirs, you'll get less performance than
EXT3/4 on that mirror pair--possibly less than half, depending on the
size of the disks
On 3/29/2012 5:24 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> This happens with a lot of "fan boys". There was so much hype
> surrounding ZFS that even many logically thinking people were frothing
> at the mouth waiting to get their hands on it. Then, as with many/most
> things in the tech world, the goods didn't
On 3/27/2012 3:40 PM, Jeff Gustafson wrote:
I looked around the 'Net to see if there might be a custom program for
offline Maildir to mdbox conversion. So far I haven't turned up
anything. The problem for us is that the dsync program simply takes a
lot of time to convert mailboxes.
Is i
On 3/17/2012 12:36 PM, Sven Hartge wrote:
> Storing mails inside SQL? Not supported by dovecot and not very wise,
> IMHO. DBmail does this, but to be honest, I never heard any good
> feedback from admins using that product. From what I have been told, you
> need quite the beefy server to get a dece
On 3/2/2012 4:40 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Please respond... I need to know whether or not I need to pursue this,
since we use Thunderbird in house and will be switching soon to dovecot...
This mailing list is for dovecot, not Thunderbird support. The lack of
replies to Thunderbird usage ques
No, but I can help you with any questions if you want to try implementing it,
and even finish it if you get at least the basic index/search functionality
working. You can use v2.1's fts-lucene as a start.
That sounds like a great deal to me! I'm glad you're still interested
enough in it.
My initial tests for CLucene were that it would take 30% of mailbox size
(compared to 50% for Xapian). But this was before I actually implemented
it to Dovecot.. I haven't really looked at how large the indexes
actually are.
Did you ever make an fts_xapian plugin, Timo? I've looked into Xapia
I think Thunderbird does this search internally, not via IMAP. You can test
this by talking IMAP protocol directly:
telnet localhost 143
a login user pass
b select inbox
c search text hello
Yes, you definitely want to check things are being accelerated by
issuing direct IMAP commands via teln
> You mean you deleted Solr index, so that it's empty? That should work too.
>
> Anyway, in v2.1 Dovecot keeps track of what is the last indexed message in
> dovecot.index files. So if you're switching between backends or have messed
> things up in tests, you need to run "doveadm fts rescan" (f
On 12/30/2011 10:53 AM, Calvin Cochran wrote:
I am having a problem with the number of current processes that I cannot
seem to diagnose adequately, and is a possible bug. This will be a bit
long, but usually more info is better.
[]
verbose_proctitle, at this moment there are 99 connections f
Timo wrote:
Not really. For mail related processes (imap, pop3, lmtp) you could
find the largest dovecot.index.cache file and make sure that
vsz_limit is at least 3 times that.
Yikes. Aside from forcing users to "prune" mailboxes, what do you
suggest when vsz_limit exceeds available host RA
I can confirm the report posted in
http://dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2011-November/062263.html that fts_squat no
longer seems to be used after moving from 2.0.16->2.1 rc 1. I don't see crash
reports in the logs, just "0 messages indexed". My search test tool just does a
normal IMAP SEARCH for a
On Saturday 24 October 2009, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-10-24 at 02:38 +0700, Robin Atwood wrote:
> > I was glancing at my logwatch report when I noticed:
> >
> > dovecot: IMAP(robinmail):
> > fchown(/home/robinmail/mail/.imap/INBOX/dovecot.index.log.newlock
):
fchown(/home/robinmail/mail/.imap/INBOX/dovecot.index.tmp, -1, 10(wheel))
failed: Operation not permitted (egid=100(users), group based on
/var/mail/robinmail): 3 Time(s)
So what's going on here? :) I am fairly sure I never had them before. Running
dovecot 1.2.6.
TIA
-
On Tuesday 03 Feb 2009, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 20:26 +0700, Robin Atwood wrote:
> > Starting at midnight Feb 1 my phone can no longer fetch mail from
> > Dovecot. It endlessly connects and reconnects as you can see in the log
> > below. I have restart
(robinmail): mbox:
data=~/mail:INBOX=/var/mail/robinmail
Feb 1 20:14:43 opal dovecot: IMAP(robinmail): fs: root=/home/robinmail/mail,
index=, control=, inbox=/var/mail/robinmail
TIA
-Robin
--
--
Robin Atwood.
"Sh
On Saturday 13 Sep 2008, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-09-13 at 12:37 +0700, Robin Atwood wrote:
> > and I have added "mail_plugins = cmusieve" to protocol lda{}. I then
> > created a ".dovecot.sieve" script but am not sure where to place it. I
> > t
.info]
msgid=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: save failed to
INBOX: Internal error occurred. Refer to server log for more
information. [2008-09-11 12:30:13]
Full "dovecot -n" output is attached.
Regards,
Robin
# 1.1.3: /app/dovecot/1.1.3/etc/dovecot.conf
base_dir: /dovecot/run/imap/
protocols: none
ssl
e CONTROL files.
Regards,
Robin
On Saturday 29 Dec 2007, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-12-09 at 18:38 +0700, Robin Atwood wrote:
> > I use dovecot to push email to my SE P1i and it works very well. :)
> > However, I have two email accounts set up on the phone, one using my
> > domain for GPRS and publ
s the GPRS account
remains logged on and I get the mail in both inboxes. There is no option in
the email client on the phone to disconnect, so is there any trick to forcing
a disconnect from the mail server?
TIA
-Robin
--
--
On Friday 05 Oct 2007, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
> On 2007-10-05 17:48:51 +0700, Robin Atwood wrote:
> your libdrac is compiled without -fPIC -pic
Thanks, that did the trick!
-Robin.
--
--
Robin Atwood.
"Ship me some
when making
a shared object; recompile with -fPIC
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../lib64/libdrac.a: could not
read symbols: Bad value
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
TIA
-Robin.
--
--
Robin Atwood.
&qu
Stephan Bosch wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 11:56 +0100, Robin Breathe wrote:
>> Should the current incarnation of the patch support TLS, or is there
>> anything I need to do to enable TLS for managesieve; the Thunderbird
>> Sieve extension hangs when "Use TLS"
Stephan Bosch wrote:
> I have updated the MANAGESIEVE patch to (hopefully) fix the compilation
> issues reported by Robin Breathe. This is a patch against the latest
> stable release 1.0.3. It currently won't compile with 1.1 due to
> significant changes in the master code.
I
Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 15:29 +0100, Robin Breathe wrote:
>> Stephan Bosch wrote:
>>> Have fun testing the patch. Notify me when there are problems.
>> Stephan,
>>
>> There's a small problem with your patch as it stands: it depend
reasonable error given that sieve_runenv_mark_duplicate() is a void
function with a return :) Removing the "return" leads to a clean build,
but it's not clear what implications that might have.
NB: this is applied against dovecot-1.0.3, though only one of the hunks
is off by 1 line.
Regards,
Robin
39 matches
Mail list logo
