Hello Aki,
fts-solr is still crashing here.
We have many X- headers from antispam, DKIM, and so on, I don't know if it
has anything to do with it.
The same configuration worked a couple of versions ago.
Regards,
Diego.
Latest debian 10.7, binaries from
repo.dovecot.org/ce-2.3-latest/debian/buster
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 8:17 PM, Robert Gierzinger wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just wanted to give SOLR 5 a try, however there probably have changed
> quite some bits in the config files, did not even manage to create a core
> with various solrconfig.xml and schema.xml files, but I am absolutely no
> e
chroot.
I hope this feature can be considered useful and soon included in
dovecot.
Regards,
Diego Liziero.
diff -dur dovecot-1.0.10/dovecot-example.conf dovecot-1.0.10-disable-slash-dot-slash-chroot/dovecot-example.conf
--- dovecot-1.0.10/dovecot-example.conf 2007-12-11 19:52:08.0 +0
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 14:53 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 13:40 +0100, Diego Liziero wrote:
> > This patch adds the bool option home_slash_dot_slash_chroot (feel free
> > to change this name to something easier to understand). Setting this to
> > &qu
r itself,
or if it is doing something useful.
Regards,
Diego Liziero.
---
1104 void mail_index_map_move_to_memory(struct mail_index_map *map)
1105 {
1106struct mail_index_record_map *new_map;
1107
1108if (map->rec_map->mmap_base == NULL)
1109return;
1110
i_assert(
On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's copying over itself, so it shouldn't break anything. But I fixed
> the error anyway: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.1/rev/8e014fd46e84
Thanks Timo. With this patch valgrind gives 0 errors most of the time.
Forgiv
On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 2:07 AM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [..]
>
> 180 (124 direct, 56 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss
> record 3 of 5
> [..]
> by 0x80B59CB: mail_transaction_log_file_alloc
> (mail-transaction-log
To some users happens this assertion failure while deleting a message.
dovecot: Mar 10 08:40:44 Panic: IMAP(user): file index-sync.c: line 39
(index_mailbox_set_recent_uid): assertion failed: (seq_range_exists
(&ibox->recent_flags, uid))
dovecot: Mar 10 08:40:44 Error: IMAP(user): Raw backtrace: [
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To some users happens this assertion failure while deleting a message.
>
> dovecot: Mar 10 08:40:44 Panic: IMAP(user): file index-sync.c: line 39
> (index_mailbox_set_recent_uid): assertion failed:
Hi,
another imap crash with latest dovecot.
segmentation fault in fetch_bodystructure
src/imap/imap-fetch.c
static int fetch_bodystructure(struct imap_fetch_context *ctx,
struct mail *mail, void *context ATTR_UNUSED)
{
const char *bodystructure;
if
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Well, I'm not sure how you managed to cause this, but this should fix
> it: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.1/rev/7e27d67d3abe
Thank you Timo for the quick fix,
here we have latest rc3 in a production environment.
It h
Hi,
I'm collecting users feedback of latest dovecot 1.1.rc3 development release.
Some users are complaining that their sent mails sometimes don't get
written to imap Sent-mail folder.
It seems that all these users were using multiple istances of imap
processes to read their mail
(thunderbird+hord
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Has anyone had similar issues?
Charles Marcus wrote:
> Yes... I don't believe this is a dovecot issue, as this is an occasional
> issue with Thunderbird I've seen on both dovecot and C
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Diego Liziero wrote:
> [..]
> Some users are complaining that their sent mails sometimes don't get
> written to imap Sent-mail folder.
Tim Alberts wrote:
> [..] I'm finding that using multiple clients at the same time, changes are not
&
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 3:36 AM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Enabling rawlog (http://wiki.dovecot.org/Debugging/Rawlog) and looking
> at what exactly gets sent at that time could be useful.
I did it but I could't find anything useful.
Then I decided to use wireshark on the clie
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 11:44 AM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It is written as a disconnect reason:
>
Sorry Timo, you're right, my fault, it was there on info_log among
tons of other debug messages, and I was watching the error log.
> I thought Thunderbird was using max. 5 conn
I'm still collecting user feedback after moving from uw-imap to
dovecot development release 1.1.rc3.
What said in the subject seems the obvious result of an improper configuration.
Office emails are configured and accessed on multiple clients with the
same automatic filters, and sometimes the filt
Attached the rawlogs while this happens.
I've also a tar.gz of .imap dir of the affected user while this was
happening, should I post it, too?
Regards,
Diego.
20080313-094002-29657.in
Description: Binary data
20080313-094002-29657.out
Description: Binary data
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Dean Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Can you confirm that the patch Timo submited in the above link fixes
> this problem for 1.1rc3? If so, will this be committed for rc4 or beyond?
>
No, the above patch was about another issue (segmentation fault in
fetch_
Yes, again, some sent emails don't get copied to sent folder.
This time I get the following error:
Error: IMAP(username): UIDs broken with partial sync in mbox file
/maildir/username/Sent
This happened at least with thunderbird and with evolution.
Dovecot is running on vith fcntl locking on Cent
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, again, some sent emails don't get copied to sent folder.
Thist time the reporter reproduced the issue because of a client wrong
configuration and without the related error (he was using a secondary
ac
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 1:31 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 19:19 +0100, Diego Liziero wrote:
>
> > Error: IMAP(username): UIDs broken with partial sync in mbox file
> > /maildir/username/Sent
>
> Do you use mbox_very_dirty_syncs=yes?
Mmm... actually t
Not sure if this should be included in dovecot, just posting if someone
feels like using valgrind.
Diego.
-
diff -r ba634d2c0ab9 src/master/login-process.c
--- a/src/master/login-process.cWed Apr 30 20:18:37 2008 +0300
+++ b/src/master/login-process.cThu May 01 00:59:10 2008 +
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 13:17 +0100, Diego Liziero wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > To some users happens this assertion
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Diego Liziero wrote:
> > > To some users happens this assertion failure while deleting a message.
> > >
> > > dovecot: Mar 10 08:40:44 Panic: I
Timo,
I was wondering If I can help you in spotting the cause of this
assertion failure (got this morning with rc5)
adding some i_info/debug and other seq_range_exists tests.
This morning all assertion failures were caused by users that deleted
with thunderbird many emails from inbox and thunderbi
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-05-26 at 15:08 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote:
>> I'm talking about mbox Sent folder, where some mailers append through
>> imap server
>> a copy of each message they send.
>>
I'm talking about mbox Sent folder, where some mailers append through
imap server
a copy of each message they send.
Sometimes, just three header lines got appended instead of the whole
mail message, such as:
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri May 23 12:30:14 2008
X-UID: 2852
Status: RO
This happened i
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 11:17 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Could it be that the connection died client was trying to save it, so it
> never got there? Although it still shouldn't have left the From-line there.
The mailer didn't crashed.
When it happened to me I thought about a
On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 16:48 +0200, Dan Horák wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am the new maintainer of dovecot for Fedora and Red Hat and so I am
> trying to cleanup some old reported bugs.
> [..]
Mmm.. I was wondering if it's worth to have a look at the various
dovecot patches used by main distributions bef
Got this using dovecot-1.1 (hg version of 2 days ago).
I mean with http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.1/rev/c4342385d696 included.
Regards,
Diego.
-
Panic: IMAP(username): Trying to close mailbox INBOX with open transactions
(gdb) bt
#0 0x007c3402 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
#1 0x00138ba0 in raise
And got this regression with dovecot-1.1.rc7 with each pop3 connection,
hg version of 2 days ago was working fine.
Now I'm back again to hg before "Message sort index handling rewrite".
Regards,
Diego.
---
Panic: POP3(username): file index-mail.c: line 1007: unreached
(gdb) bt
#0 0x00b91402 in
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 12:47 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-05-30 at 23:19 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote:
>> And got this regression with dovecot-1.1.rc7
>> ---
>> Panic: POP3(username): file index-mail.c: line 1007: unreached
>
> Broke w
mbox messages gets header corruption caused by an extra linefeed after
Content-Length
Users sees their mails in Sent mbox folder without the from and to
fields, without attachments and with the date of 1/1/1970
Diego.
---
Here is an anonymized header:
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jun 03 09:14:33
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 5:43 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Maybe this helps? http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.1/rev/dd9d344ba140
>>
>> Thanks Timo, I'll let you know if it happens again with this patch.
>
> That only causes the empty message not to be written at all, it doesn't
>
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:34 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote:
>> mbox messages get header corruption caused by an extra linefeed after
>> Content-Length
>
> Fixed: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.1/rev
> On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 23:59 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote:
> As the extra linefeed is between Content-Length and Subject headers,
> I'm thinking about using a regexp based replace such as
> s/(Content-Length: [0-9]+)\n\n(Subject: )/$1\n$2/s
> but I can't find how to mak
On Friday 20 June 2008, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 09:42 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote:
> >
> > Timo,
> > here is an anonymized mbox file that causes it at every body search
> > (tested with rc12).
>
> Did you test it without index files? I couldn
Any chance to have this assert converted to error as last patch before 1.1?
Or am I the only one that is still getting this in rc13?
Regards,
Diego
--- ./src/lib-storage/index/index-sync.c-orig 2008-03-13
16:46:36.0 +0100
+++ ./src/lib-storage/index/index-sync.c2008-03-13
16:51
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 11:17 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Could it be that the connection died client was trying to save it, so it
>> never got there? Although it s
Here is the log.
---
dovecot: Jul 25 07:18:35 Panic: IMAP(user): file index-mail.c: line
1091 (index_mail_close): assertion failed:
(!mail->data.destroying_stream)
dovecot: Jul 25 07:18:35 Error: IMAP(user): Raw backtrace:
/usr/libexec/dovecot/imap [0x80f5fd4] -> /usr/libexec/dovecot/imap
[0x80f68
I was wondering if it could be useful to use such tools to keep track
of users bugs.
I find somehow harder to search the mailing list if a bug is known, if
it's being worked on, if it needs more feedback, in witch release it
has been eventually solved, and so on.
Any thoughts?
Regards,
Diego.
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 11:17 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe this he
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:13 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 18:08 +0200, Andreas M. Kirchwitz wrote:
>> >> Jul 12 01:04:45 linux dovecot: Panic: IMAP(user2): file index-sync.c:
>> line 39 (index_mailbox_set_recent_uid): assertion failed:
>> (seq_range_exists
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 1, 2008, at 12:51 AM, Diego Liziero wrote:
>
> I was wondering if it could be useful to use such tools to keep track
>> of users bugs.
>>
>> I find somehow harder to search the m
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 1:09 AM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 1, 2008, at 1:49 AM, Diego Liziero wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 3:48 PM, D
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 12:07 AM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 3, 2008, at 10:31 PM, Diego Liziero wrote:
>
>> It seems so,
>> I sent you privately the rawlog and the last part of a sent-mail mailbox.
>
> The interesting thing about that rawlo
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Maybe this helps? http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.1/rev/8ab845d3c96d
>
It seems so, thanks Timo.
With this patch, by now, all sent mails are correctly written in
"Sent" folder, I'let you know if I've just been lucky :)
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:13 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 18:08 +0200, Andreas M. Kirchwitz wrote:
>>> >> Jul 12 01:04:45 linux dovecot: P
On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 4:26 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 6, 2008, at 6:11 AM, Diego Liziero wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Maybe this helps? http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.1
Today I updated to current dovecot-1.1 hg tree and I got many of these
assertion failures:
file istream.c: line 303 (i_stream_read_data): assertion failed:
(stream->stream_errno != 0)
(gdb) bt full
#0 0x00352402 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
No symbol table info available.
#1 0x0043ed20 in raise () fr
file message-address.c: line 43 (parse_local_part): assertion failed:
(ctx->parser.data != ctx->parser.end)
#0 0x001b3402 in __kernel_vsyscall ()
No symbol table info available.
#1 0x0043ed20 in raise () from /lib/libc.so.6
No symbol table info available.
#2 0x00440631 in abort () from /lib/lib
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 9:35 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Could you do:
>
>> #6 0x080fcb64 in i_stream_read_data (stream=0x9094a08,
>> data_r=0xbfe6, size_r=0xbfe64440, threshold=0) at istream.c:303
>> ret = -1
>> read_more = false
>> __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ =
I'm not sure when this happened.
In yesterday dovecot-1.1 hg if pop3 is compiled with DEBUG defined, it
needs GDB=1 otherwise it ends with:
Panic: Leaked file fd 4: dev 104.2 inode 3342766
Not sure if this can be caused by the fact that I call pop3 with a bash script.
protocol pop3 {
mail_ex
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 11:10 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> a) make the pop3 process sleep at startup so you can do ls
> -l /proc/pid/fd/4
Pop3 is fine, it was my fault, I left a file descriptor open.
Sorry for the noise.
Diego.
I've read somewhere that one of gfs2 goals was to improve performance
for directory access with many files.
I've tested it doing a simple ls in a directory with many test empty
files in gfs and it was _really_ slow, doing the ls on a gfs2 with the
same amount of emtpy files is actually faster.
Bu
I got it with multiple imaptest instances even with current dovecot-1.1 hg tree.
I checked the emails with that UIDs and they are actually truncated.
Some things I noted on these mails:
- they are all with MIME multipart attachments.
- the last multipart attachment is truncated
- the truncated la
2008/10/1 Rene Luria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Dovecot dies with signal 11 (segfault) when doing some commands with a
> specific message
Could you post a backtrace (bt full) of the core file?
See:
http://dovecot.org/bugreport.html
Regards,
Diego.
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 9:56 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 22:01 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 9:35 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Could you do:
> > >
On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 4:22 PM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Not sure if it's related, but the only assertion that is failing now
> is this one (sorry, this time I've no core file):
>
> file index-mail.c: line 1091 (index_mail_close): assertion
On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 5:14 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 17:00 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote:
>> >
>> > file index-mail.c: line 1091 (index_mail_close): assertion failed:
>> > (!mail->data.destroying_stream)
>
> Hmm
On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 15:27 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>> On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 22:35 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote:
>> > I got it with multiple imaptest instances even with current dovecot-1.1 hg
On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 6:34 PM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 15:27 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 22:35 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote
dsn_ok
> <> OK
>
> == filter
> /./ FILTER filter:[1.2.3.4]:10024
>
> where "filter:[1.2.3" is what you used to put in content_filter.
Yes, that's what I was thinking when I wrote "workaround" in my first mail:
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 5:08 PM,
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 9:18 PM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've read somewhere that one of gfs2 goals was to improve performance
> for directory access with many files.
>
> I've tested it doing a simple ls in a directory with many test empty
> files
I've tried to stress test dovecot 1.1.4 with imaptest for days without
any assertion failure or crash.
Just some "got too little data" messages.
So far it's the most stable 1.1.x version.
Today a user got this imap segfault with vanilla 1.1.4 (I don't know
if it's something you have already fixed
On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 17:23 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote:
>>
>> Not the asset in the subject, but "file index-mail.c: line 1091
>> (index_mail_close): assertion failed: (!mail->data.destro
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 2008, at 11:33 AM, Diego Liziero wrote:
>
>> Today a user got this imap segfault with vanilla 1.1.4 (I don't know
>
> Hmm. And Maildir as topic says?
No, sorry, wrong subjec
I know it seems at least unusual.
But I would like to know if someone knows a software that can proxy
multiple pop3 and imap connections to the same account and use only
imap connections to the real server.
I need it because I've to deal with two pieces of software that are
out of my control:
-
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Sotiris Tsimbonis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't think that you'll find any piece of software that internally
> 'translates' pop3 commands to imap ..
Unless it saves a local copy of the mailbox...
> Pop3 sessions are usually locked, so multiple sessions a
Dovecot 1.1.7 is running so smoothly that I gave up checking its log
files daily. :)
I've just had a look, and among the usual
"IMAP(username): FETCH for mailbox Sent UID xx got too little data: xx vs xx"
messages (that means that unfortunately sometimes some messages are
still written truncated)
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Diego Liziero wrote:
> Dovecot 1.1.7 is running so smoothly that I gave up checking its log
> files daily. :)
>
> I've just had a look, and among the usual
> "IMAP(username): FETCH for mailbox Sent UID xx got too little data: xx vs xx&quo
Sorry, this time I've no core file, (I forgot to set ulimit -c
unlimited before starting dovecot)
Regards,
Diego.
---
dovecot: Dec 09 08:26:52 Panic: IMAP(user): file mbox-sync-rewrite.c:
line 590 (mbox_sync_rewrite): assertion failed:
(mails[idx].from_offset == start_offset)
dovecot: Dec 09 08:26
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
> I did several mbox fixes today. Wonder if they could have fixed also
> some of these other mbox bugs you've reported?
I'm stress-testing current 1.1.x mercurial head with imaptest and with
my account.
So far everything seems fine.
It sou
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Diego Liziero wrote:
> Sorry, this time I've no core file, (I forgot to set ulimit -c
> unlimited before starting dovecot)
No, I didn't forget, I got it again without core file because this is
another "disk full" assertion failure.
B
First the good news: with these patches, the "Next message
unexpectedly lost" bugs I got so far were all caused reading a mbox
written by a previous version of dovecot.
So I think this time you really fixed the last annoying 1.1.x bug :)
Then another doubt: with these patches I'm still getting so
ct but about the last 30 percent is
> only grey.
Could you please have a look if you are seeing messages like this in
your dovecot.log?
Error: IMAP(username): FETCH for mailbox Sent UID 2375 got too little
data: 4096 vs 5247
(with different numbers)
Thanks,
Diego Liziero.
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Charles Marcus
wrote:
> On 2/12/2009 3:31 AM, Frank Bonnet wrote:
>> dovecot: Feb 11 16:07:27 Error: IMAP(dumontj): FETCH for mailbox Sent
>> UID 7139 got too little data: 2 vs 11160
>> dovecot: Feb 11 16:07:27 Error: IMAP(dumontj): Corrupted index cache
>> fil
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 12:32 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 00:10 +0100, Diego Liziero wrote:
>> >> dovecot: Feb 11 16:07:27 Error: IMAP(dumontj): FETCH for mailbox Sent
>> >> UID 7139 got too little data: 2 vs 11160
> ..
>> When this err
79 matches
Mail list logo
