Re: slightly OT - qmail scanner

2001-10-18 Thread Nathan J . Mehl
In the immortal words of duncan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Has anyone use qmail scanner with vpopmail? Yes. > Can anyone make any statements to qmail scanner and its performance or > reliability? Install and configure once, then forget about it. I wish it were written in something with a bit less

Re: AGAIN: BUG in vdelivermail

2001-10-26 Thread Nathan J . Mehl
In the immortal words of Yavuz Aydin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > I am posting this again because it has been a week now and this bug is not > resolved. > > Mail is not being delivered to catch-all accounts of domains added with > vadddomain with the -u option. The error that is generated is as fo

the magical vanishing tcp.smtp file

2001-10-30 Thread Nathan J . Mehl
Ever since I migrated my old vpopmail-4.9 setup on Solaris 2.6 to 5.0-final one Solaris 8, I've found that my tcp.smtp file disappears every time ~/vpopmail/bin/clearopensmtp is run out of cron. Am I missing something? -n <[EMAIL PROT

weird auth errors after 4.9 -> 5.0 update

2001-10-08 Thread Nathan J . Mehl
Due to an unexpected system crash, I ended up making a somewhat hurried migration from vpopmail 4.9.8 and sqwebmail 0.99 on a solaris 2.6 system to vpopmail 5.0 and sqwebmail 3.0 on a solaris 8 box. Mail delivery and sqwebmail work perfectly, but strangely, vchkpw itself (and thus, pop3 access)

Re: weird auth errors after 4.9 -> 5.0 update

2001-10-08 Thread Nathan J . Mehl
In the immortal words of Ken Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Is this a domain owned by vpopmail or a different user? > What is the domain? This is a vpopmail user in the null/default domain. (Ie: ~vpopmail/users/velcro/) > What are the contents of the assign file for the domain? =velcro:velcro:78

Re: weird auth errors after 4.9 -> 5.0 update

2001-10-08 Thread Nathan J . Mehl
In the immortal words of Gabriel Ambuehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > This is a vpopmail user in the null/default domain. (Ie: > > ~vpopmail/users/velcro/) > > If you don't need support for /etc/passwd users, I highly recommend > you add the default domain as "normal" domain and recreate the > users

Re: weird auth errors after 4.9 -> 5.0 update

2001-10-09 Thread Nathan J . Mehl
In the immortal words of Nathan J . Mehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > In the immortal words of Ken Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > Is this a domain owned by vpopmail or a different user? > > What is the domain? > > This is a vpopmail user in the null/default domain. (Ie: >

null domain problems redux

2001-10-10 Thread Nathan J . Mehl
So, doing a bit of actual debugging here... (This is hampered by the fact that all the C I know, I learned from reading perl and guessing; my apologies in advance.) My problem with being unable to authenticate users in the null domain appears to reside somewhere in vauth.c, around line 369:

Re: null domain problems redux

2001-10-11 Thread Nathan J . Mehl
In the immortal words of [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > The users directory is depricated and only used for backwards > compatibility. It should not be used. Any users in your users > directory should be moved to a virtual domain directory. Er, "used for backwards compatibility" is a

Re: vpopmail & courier-imap

2001-10-12 Thread Nathan J . Mehl
In the immortal words of Charlie Chrisman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > ive not gotten it to work for solaris 8. still a problem. anyone had any > success with vpopmail5 on solaris 8? Other than my elsewhere noted problem with legacy domain-less users, vpopmail 5.0-finalbeta worked pretty much out of

RFE: Server Root vs Document Root

2000-08-08 Thread Nathan J. Mehl
One thing that's been mildly aggravating me about vpopmal for a while now is that no amount of playing with the autoconf options seems to allow me to seperate the "application root", ie: ~vpopmail/{bin|include|lib} from the "document root", ie ~vpopmail/{users|domains}. Am I mising the proper in

Re: RFE: Server Root vs Document Root

2000-08-09 Thread Nathan J. Mehl
In the immortal words of Ken Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > > > One thing that's been mildly aggravating me about vpopmal for a while > > now is that no amount of playing with the autoconf options seems to > > allow me to seperate the "application root", ie: ~vpopmail/{bin|include|lib} > > from t