On Sat, 2008-06-28 at 10:00 -0700, Michael D Godfrey wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 09:40 -0700, Michael D. Godfrey wrote:
> >
> >>> > > A guess would be that this is likely due to the endianess of the
> >>> > > multiple architectures that the index is being accessed with. We have
> >>>
On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 09:40 -0700, Michael D. Godfrey wrote:
> > A guess would be that this is likely due to the endianess of the
> > multiple architectures that the index is being accessed with. We have
> > the same issue here across i686/x86_64/sparc. I'm about to post to an
> > older ema
On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 09:40 -0700, Michael D. Godfrey wrote:
> > A guess would be that this is likely due to the endianess of the
> > multiple architectures that the index is being accessed with. We have
> > the same issue here across i686/x86_64/sparc. I'm about to post to an
> > older email th
A guess would be that this is likely due to the endianess of the
multiple architectures that the index is being accessed with. We have
the same issue here across i686/x86_64/sparc. I'm about to post to an
older email thread about this as well.
This is a good guess. We use a mixture of i386 and
A guess would be that this is likely due to the endianess of the
multiple architectures that the index is being accessed with. We have
the same issue here across i686/x86_64/sparc. I'm about to post to an
older email thread about this as well.
Michael D. Godfrey wrote:
System: Linux 2.6.25.
System: Linux 2.6.25.6-55.fc9.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Jun 10 16:05:21 EDT
2008 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Dovecot: dovecot-1.0.14-8.fc9.x86_64
We have used Dovecot for several years. The error message below appears
in the system log
quite frequently. I have run a test which shows that this mess
