Re: [Dovecot] 1.1.6: PAM passdb/userdb (mis)configuration
I was not able to reproduce the Outlook/OL Express users complaints (in a test system). As it turned out, a DB problem in one of our ldap servers led to dovecot authentication failures - showing in the logs that shadow authentication failed. Deleting the passdb shadow (plus clean up of tens of dovecot-auth processes) fixed it. A couple of days later, a user complained that he can't login with Outlook (OL asking for his password again and again), and a check revealed that his password exired :-) Still not using authentication cache... Just FYI. On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:49:47PM -0500, Timo Sirainen wrote: On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 09:14 +0200, Oved Ben-Aroya wrote: which work fine, except for Outlook/OL Express users that are asked for their password whenever they send/receive... We've had also passdb shadow that somehow fixed this This really makes no sense. Outlook doesn't know if you're using PAM or shadow. Do you mean that Outlook anyway can successfully log in, but just asks the password all the time? Sorry I was not clear in my description of the problem. Yes, users of Outlook log in and read their mail just fine. However, whenever they want to refresh the inbox or send mail, they are presented with a login window of Outlook. With the passdb shadow directive that somehow crept in, Outlook users were not asked for password after they logged in (however this broke the password exiration). Well, there is some difference between what PAM and shadow does. Perhaps PAM starts failing the login after some time? Enable auth_debug=yes and see what the difference is between when using shadow and pam. The difference between Outlook/OE and other clients is that they keep logging out and back in all the time, while other clients typically log in only once. Perhaps you have a PAM plugin that limits the number of logins to once every n minutes or something? I wonder if we need to enable authentication cache? It shouldn't be necessary, but if the problem is something like what I described above then auth cache will probably work around the actual problem in most cases (but not all). -- \Oved Dr. Oved Ben-Aroya, Head Unix group, Taub Computer Center, Technion Phone: +972 (4) 829 3688 FAX: +972 (4) 823 6212 o...@technion.ac.il PGP key at http://tx.technion.ac.il/~oved/pgp/pubkey PGP Key fingerprint: A9 52 46 04 E8 70 41 99 60 E3 DA 8F BA 39 C2 C8
[Dovecot] Error: Maximum number of mail processes exceeded (see max_mail_processes setting)
Hello I have this message repeated several times each *seconds* in /var/log/dovecot/dovecot.log the max_mail_processes is set to 8192 and I can see an average of 500 imap processes on the machine , I think there is a problem somewhere ... Debian 64 bits , IBM X3650 biproc , 7 Gb RAM , RAID5 disks , 2 ethernet Gb ports bonded. Dovecot 1.1.11 has been compiled from scratch on the machine Thanks for any info.
Re: [Dovecot] Deferred emails on alias emails
Hi, I finally found my solution so I give it here if ever it interestes anyone. I needed to use postsuper -r ALL in order to requeue the whole message list and they were then using the new postfix configuration. Note though that if you have a lot lot of spooled messages, the ALL is maybe not a good idea if they are mainly for a single server. In my case, most of these messages were forwarded to the gmail servers, and as there were many spams unfortunately in these emails forwarded (and it's not my server's purpose to remove the spams when forwarding), all requeued and sent in the following minutes, I saw in my logs that gmail has temporarily blocked my server with a human readable message from Google in my logs. Bye. Jehan Anyway now it works. On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Jehan Pagès jehan.marmott...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, I am currently making a fresh install of email server. I am having some issue with dovecot-antispam (cf. other emails), and noticed that I was having issues on aliases, which apparently where not forwarded to the actual SMTP server after passing through dspam. Still don't figure why but temporarily disable the dspam filter, which anyway is not useful in the current state of this installation. Now the email to an alias are well forwarded to the real finale server. But I still have many emails which were deferred in the last days and I cannot have them decrease. # ls -l /var/spool/postfix/defer/* | wc -l 297 If I run postqueue -f to flush this all, I can see the number down, but fastly comes back to 297. Reading the logs, they are passed to dovecot, which was probably the issue before I disabled dspam. It was trying to deliver a message after filtering it, but in the case of aliases, of course, it cannot because the account is not local (so it does not find the account and defers the email forever)! So it should give it back to postfix so that this one contacts the aliased server (gmail.com in the example below). Feb 4 13:33:18 ks34186 postfix/lmtp[31100]: 82769869FA: to= someem...@gmail.com, orig to=someem...@mydomain.tld, relay=mail.mydomain.tld[/var/run/dspam/dspam.sock] conn use=28, delay=142296, delays=142277/19/0/0.41, dsn=4.3.0, status=deferred (host mail.mydomain.tld[/var/run/dspam/dspam.sock] said: 421 4.3.0 someem...@gmail.com Auto-Whitelisted (in reply to end of DATA command)) Feb 4 13:33:18 ks34186 dovecot: auth(default): master in: USER 1 someem...@gmail.com service=deliver Feb 4 13:33:18 ks34186 dovecot: auth(default): passwd(someem...@gmail.com): lookup Feb 4 13:33:18 ks34186 dovecot: auth(default): passwd(someem...@gmail.com): unknown user Feb 4 13:33:18 ks34186 dovecot: auth-worker(default): sql( someem...@gmail.com): SELECT maildir as home, 1004 as uid, 1004 as gid FROM mailbox WHERE username = 'someem...@gmail.com' AND active = '1' Feb 4 13:33:18 ks34186 dovecot: auth-worker(default): sql( someem...@gmail.com): Unknown user Feb 4 13:33:18 ks34186 dovecot: auth(default): master out: NOTFOUND1 So is there a way please to flush this whole spool so that it now uses the new method (which is stop using dspam until I figure how to use it) and so that I can forward these emails to their recipient? Thanks. Jehan P.S.: this is maybe more a postfix issue than a dovecot issue though... but you probably all know well postfix as well.
Re: [Dovecot] Deferred emails on alias emails
On 2/5/2009, Jehan Pagès (jehan.marmott...@gmail.com) wrote: and as there were many spams unfortunately in these emails forwarded (and it's not my server's purpose to remove the spams when forwarding), all requeued and sent in the following minutes, I saw in my logs that gmail has temporarily blocked my server with a human readable message from Google in my logs. Bye. You should make it your servers business to do just that, otherwise you risk getting blocked (like you said you just did), when your server blindly forwards a ton of spam to other servers that DO care. -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] Deferred emails on alias emails
Hi, I don't agree. If antispam systems were really 100% sure to never have any false positive, I would agree (having false negative is less an issue). But we all know that such system does not exist yet (and probably never will IMHO, even though efficiency may increase to close to 100%, as it is still humans behind emails, we will never be able to trust fully a machine to class them). For such reason, I cannot do such a thing as blocking spams for users (I could tag them, but not block them) without giving possibility to check the blocked email. As it is an alias, then it is more difficult to manage (you can provide such system to local users, but when someone makes a redirection from one of his emails to another, this is usually to deal all of one's emails with the finale account). I don't think any email provider does just block spams. For what happened here, the issue was that I have had an issue of the emails for aliases which were blocked in my spool for days. Then I managed to deblock them, but they have been all sent on the row (so this looked suspicious by the gmail server, which is normal). And as for many accounts, they receive a lot of spam (I receive a hundred everyday myself because of the age of my address). On normal use, they are simply received slowly during the day. That's unfortunate, but I cannot do what you say for these reasons. This is somehow a question of network neutrality ( http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/144 ). But don't make me tell what I don't: I would love to be able to block spam and if a secure antispam system appears, then I would use it. I don't argue that spam is potentially interesting and that we should allow it for people loving it (who?!) of course; the neutrality is only lost when the antispam fails and caught non-spam as well, because it is then a regulation system which controls people's personal data and would improve net experience of many at the price of data loss for others. As a conclusion: email hosting is not my business, I am a developper, not an admin, and this server is only for my personal use and of a few friends... (you guess I wouldn't have such issue if it was a professional server). So there will never be tons of spam redirected to other servers (and only one guy in my server has such a redirection anyway, moreover my smtp servers is not accepting email relaying from unknown users). Regards, Jehan On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.comwrote: On 2/5/2009, Jehan Pagès (jehan.marmott...@gmail.com) wrote: and as there were many spams unfortunately in these emails forwarded (and it's not my server's purpose to remove the spams when forwarding), all requeued and sent in the following minutes, I saw in my logs that gmail has temporarily blocked my server with a human readable message from Google in my logs. Bye. You should make it your servers business to do just that, otherwise you risk getting blocked (like you said you just did), when your server blindly forwards a ton of spam to other servers that DO care. -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] v1.1.11 released - killall crash
On Feb 3, 2009, at 5:53 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: http://dovecot.org/releases/1.1/dovecot-1.1.11.tar.gz http://dovecot.org/releases/1.1/dovecot-1.1.11.tar.gz.sig Just FYI, ONLY SINCE UPGRADING TO 1.1.11 from 1.1.10, a 'killall dovecot' yields this... Feb 5 07:59:23 G520X2 dovecot: Killed with signal 15 Feb 5 07:59:23 G520X2 dovecot: child 23439 (^?) returned error 82 (Internal logging error) Feb 5 07:59:24 G520X2 crashdump[23503]: dovecot crashed Feb 5 07:59:24 G520X2 crashdump[23503]: crash report written to: / Library/Logs/CrashReporter/dovecot.crash.log Contents of crash log... Host Name: G520X2 Date/Time: 2009-02-05 07:59:24.054 -0600 OS Version: 10.4.11 (Build 8S165) Report Version: 4 Command: dovecot Path:/usr/local/sbin/dovecot Parent: launchd [1] Version: ??? (???) PID:22087 Thread: 0 Exception: EXC_BAD_ACCESS (0x0001) Codes: KERN_PROTECTION_FAILURE (0x0002) at 0x0018 Thread 0 Crashed: 0 0x0018 0 + 24 1 dovecot 0x4284 child_processes_deinit + 36 (child-process.c: 226) 2 dovecot 0xaaa8 main + 2504 (main.c:333) 3 dovecot 0x1d4c _start + 760 4 dovecot 0x1a50 start + 48 Thread 0 crashed with PPC Thread State 64: srr0: 0x0018 srr1: 0x10004000f030vrsave: 0x cr: 0x84004434 xer: 0x2000 lr: 0x40fc ctr: 0x0018 r0: 0x0018 r1: 0xb8d0 r2: 0x00029fbc r3: 0x00301fa0 r4: 0x5b8f r5: 0x0001 r6: 0x r7: 0x r8: 0x r9: 0x r10: 0x0002 r11: 0xa00061ec r12: 0x0018 r13: 0x0002a0f4 r14: 0x0002a0f4 r15: 0x0002a0f4 r16: 0x r17: 0x0002a0f4 r18: 0x r19: 0x0002a0f4 r20: 0x r21: 0x0001 r22: 0x r23: 0x r24: 0x0001 r25: 0x91e0 r26: 0x00301fa0 r27: 0xd5ec r28: 0x000961e8 r29: 0x00096288 r30: 0x5b8f r31: 0x3db4 Binary Images Description: 0x1000 -0x28fff dovecot /usr/local/sbin/dovecot 0x8fe0 - 0x8fe52fff dyld 46.16 /usr/lib/dyld 0x9000 - 0x901bcfff libSystem.B.dylib /usr/lib/libSystem.B.dylib 0x90214000 - 0x90219fff libmathCommon.A.dylib /usr/lib/system/ libmathCommon.A.dylib You may remember an obscure OS X bug relative to the syslogd restart. For over a year I've been sending the 'killall' in a daily.local or else dovecot's log entries would not get written to mail.log after the syslogd gets restarted. Since I'm using the OS X launchdaemons, dovecot gets restarted after the 'killall'. Anyway, for over the year, this crash had never been written to the logs prior to last night and upgrading to 1.1.11. All continues to work fine but something has definitely changed since 1.1.10. B. Bodger
Re: [Dovecot] Deferred emails on alias emails
On 2/5/2009, Jehan Pagès (jehan.marmott...@gmail.com) wrote: That's unfortunate, but I cannot do what you say for these reasons. This is somehow a question of network neutrality ( http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/144 ). Not sure what net neutrality has to do with this... unless you are syaing you are operating an ISP service? But don't make me tell what I don't: I would love to be able to block spam and if a secure antispam system appears, then I would use it. I don't argue that spam is potentially interesting and that we should allow it for people loving it (who?!) of course; the neutrality is only lost when the antispam fails and caught non-spam as well, because it is then a regulation system which controls people's personal data and would improve net experience of many at the price of data loss for others. Even for ISPs, there are a number of ways to dramatically reduce spam with pretty much zero false positives... ASSP (and now ASSPS) is a great tool... http://apps.sourceforge.net/mediawiki/assp/ Forwarding OBVIOUS spam is simply passing on what should be your problem to others. -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] pop3_lock_session question
Thanks. More questions about the first patch: Is it necessary to apply this patch in 1.1, if we are using pop3_no_flag_updates = yes? (And, is it compatible with pop3_no_flag_updates in 1.2?) Updating messages as seen was confusing to users who accessed their mail with both POP and IMAP, so we turned it off. Thanks, Alan Ferrency pair Networks, Inc. a...@pair.com On Wed, 4 Feb 2009, Timo Sirainen wrote: On Feb 4, 2009, at 9:02 PM, Mark Costlow wrote: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.2/rev/6f29380ba3a0 http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.2/rev/ea9a186d64f9 Are both of these patches needed for the unlock after a few seconds feature, or just the 2nd one? I ask because the description of the 1st one doesn't seem related at first look. Also, the 2nd one applies cleanly to 1.1 but the other one doesn't due to some name changes (at least -- I haven't looked closely at what else might have changed in those files from 1.1 to 1.2). The first one is there so that Dovecot's behavior is correct if RSET command is given. Although now that I think about it, it should set \Seen flags for all messages that have already been sucessfully RETRed, even if client doesn't issue QUIT afterwards. That's how the old code behaved. Have to fix that one tomorrow.
Re: [Dovecot] dirsize quota in sql pass db?
Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Feb 4, 2009, at 11:21 PM, Ken Anderson wrote:
Is there a way to return a per user dirsize quota from a passdb sql
lookup? If so, what is the syntax?
Yes, but only if you use prefetch userdb. Do you? If not, you'll need to
return it from userdb.
So, prefetch userdb is all or none. My userdb is currently /etc/passwd
to keep sendmail and other legacy stuff happy. I used fs quota, but am
now moving INBOX to a different (faster) partition, which breaks fs
quota reporting in things like squirrelmail.
Dovecot is 1.0.5
What would you suggest?
Thanks,
Ken
maybe select quota as userdb_quota?
..and in mysql table, quota column would be:
quota=dirsize:storage=10240 ?
dirsize:storage=10240 actuall. Or more easily keep the quota number in
SQL and use:
select concat('dirsize:storage=', quota) as userdb_quota
I'm using mbox, with /etc/passwd userdb, and mysql passdb.
What Dovecot version?
Re: [Dovecot] Deferred emails on alias emails
Hi, On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.comwrote: Not sure what net neutrality has to do with this... unless you are syaing you are operating an ISP service? As for I, net neutrality is not about ISP only, but also for service providers (even if not professional like I, just for the fun). Being a neutral service means not trying to control data. Hence providing email service implies that I must do my possible so that the user receives all one's data. Spam is not data, only annoyance, so if I can remove it safely, it is OK. But expected emails are data, and if there is a risk to lose it (which is still better than using it, for instance for commercial use, or said security, but still is bad), then it is not neutral. It is becoming a judge on my users' data (deciding alone what is good or not... and maybe making mistakes). This is my opinion at least. Even for ISPs, there are a number of ways to dramatically reduce spam with pretty much zero false positives... I read some documents about such methodology and was planning to probably implement whitelister ( http://blog.madism.org/index.php/2006/03/25/79-debianorg-and-spam The concept looks interesting because it is not just a stupid email blocker as using RBL which can blocks a lot of real email. Just have a look to bad email provider as hotmail or Yahoo! on which I met many people having issues of unreceived emails. These are what I call pretty unneutral service which decides that such or that small server is probably bad, without knowing it) on my server... But first I need to have my server fully functional, and currently I am first fighting with dspam. I make stuffs in the right order and whitelister (or other systems) is the next step. ;-) ASSP (and now ASSPS) is a great tool... http://apps.sourceforge.net/mediawiki/assp/ I will have a look at this, thanks. Just the website on such a complicated topic does not say much about the methodology. :-) Forwarding OBVIOUS spam is simply passing on what should be your problem to others. I am right when you are 100% sure, once again. In any other cases, it is a question of point of view as I said. Many users (I included) would consider that it is not the service provider issue to decide what is good or bad for me. Regards, Jehan
Re: [Dovecot] Error: Maximum number of mail processes exceeded (see max_mail_processes setting)
Frank Bonnet wrote: Hello I have this message repeated several times each *seconds* in /var/log/dovecot/dovecot.log the max_mail_processes is set to 8192 and I can see an average of 500 imap processes on the machine , I think there is a problem somewhere ... Debian 64 bits , IBM X3650 biproc , 7 Gb RAM , RAID5 disks , 2 ethernet Gb ports bonded. Dovecot 1.1.11 has been compiled from scratch on the machine Thanks for any info. Hi Frank, Your system is plenty powerful - no issues there. What are your settings in the init script? I found that putting in a ulimit -n 8192 and ulimit -f 16384 prior to invoking dovecot was worthwhile on my system. I would first try tweaking these settings in a root shell and then invoke dovecot with a -c conf make sure it is picking up the right conf file. I'm sure the list will ask for the dovecot -n -c ... output as well. ---Jack
[Dovecot] Understanding dovecot ACLs
Hello List I am running a Cyrus IMAP that needs to be replaced. Geting a Dovecot IMAP up and running was surprisingly simple. My configuration is close to Johnny Chaddas Howto at http://johnny.chadda.se/2007/04/15/mail-server-howto-postfix-and-dovecot-with-mysql-and-tlsssl-postgrey-and-dspam/ Its a Dovecot 1.1.10 on FreeBSD 6.4 Anyway, while basic setup was easy, i stuck in a couple of details like quota, managesieve, etc. Actual major problem and showstoper is understanding the ACLs the confuses me. So i need a hint to be guided in the right direction. What i need is a scenario, where user1 can get (for example) full access to the folders of user2, read-only access to user3 etc. A real world example: Secretary has full access to the mailfolders of her boss, boss has read-only acces to the sales-department folder. My questions: 1) is the possible? 2) can it be done with dovecot-acl files? 3) Namespaces: is it enough to have the private namespace for the job or do i need another namespace? 4) if yes, how should this namespace look like? Thanks for the help Achim
Re: [Dovecot] pop3_lock_session question
Timo Sirainen wrote: On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 14:51 -0500, Alan Ferrency wrote: One problem which might be making this worse than it needs to be, is the fact that mbox_lock_flock in mbox-lock.c is not using a blocking flock(); instead, it's polling for a non-blocking lock. This technique can cause lock starvation, if another process is dropping the lock and picking it back up again frequently: other processes will only see the lock as being available if they happen to poll for the lock at just the right instant. A better technique to use here, if it's adequately cross-platform, would be to set an alarm() for the max_wait_time, and use a blocking flock(). If the alarm times out and you don't have a lock, it's a timeout. In the meantime, you're guaranteed to eventually get the lock, if it is dropped. That's what Dovecot does elsewhere. I don't really know why I'm using non-blocking flock() calls. I guess I should fix that. That said: I'm not sure whether this will solve our problem in practice. Probably not. Why doesn't this happen with imap? Why can't we make pop3 do what imap does? Even if it's inefficient, it's better than hanging all incoming mail delivery while deliver eats up our local concurrency limits. IMAP unlocks mbox after each command is done. But POP3 clients typically just run RETR, RETR, RETR, .. so unlocking + locking again later is just extra work that slows things down. I guess there could be a timeout that if no RETR has been run for a few seconds it unlocks the mailbox. But I've never before heard POP3 clients behaving that way, so I'd like to know what exactly are they doing. Are they not sending anything? Are they NOOPing? I don't see any reason for them to be doing either.. We see it (procmail waiting on pop clients doing nothing) when a connection slows - sometimes to a crawl - on rural U.S. phone lines. Dovecot usually disconnects them after 10 minutes if the connection stops, but sometimes that process can drag on for a while. I've watched these using tcpdump. Analog modems can be quite persistent. Ken
Re: [Dovecot] Error: Maximum number of mail processes exceeded (see max_mail_processes setting)
Jack Stewart wrote: Frank Bonnet wrote: Hello I have this message repeated several times each *seconds* in /var/log/dovecot/dovecot.log the max_mail_processes is set to 8192 and I can see an average of 500 imap processes on the machine , I think there is a problem somewhere ... Debian 64 bits , IBM X3650 biproc , 7 Gb RAM , RAID5 disks , 2 ethernet Gb ports bonded. Dovecot 1.1.11 has been compiled from scratch on the machine Thanks for any info. Hi Frank, Your system is plenty powerful - no issues there. What are your settings in the init script? I found that putting in a ulimit -n 8192 and ulimit -f 16384 prior to invoking dovecot was worthwhile on my system. I would first try tweaking these settings in a root shell and then invoke dovecot with a -c conf make sure it is picking up the right conf file. I'm sure the list will ask for the dovecot -n -c ... output as well. ---Jack Bingo ! since the begining I was modifying the wrong configuration file now everything is clear , when I modified the right file the OS instant write to the shell I haven't enough file descriptors ... Shame on me and thanks a lot Jack ! Frank
Re: [Dovecot] Error: Maximum number of mail processes exceeded (see max_mail_processes setting)
Question: Do you have to have a radically greater setting for maildir than for mbox? I would think... What sort of values are people using with both formats? Sounds like a nasty thing that could bite one in the $%# come migration from mbox to maildir Frank Bonnet wrote: Jack Stewart wrote: Frank Bonnet wrote: Hello I have this message repeated several times each *seconds* in /var/log/dovecot/dovecot.log the max_mail_processes is set to 8192 and I can see an average of 500 imap processes on the machine , I think there is a problem somewhere ... Debian 64 bits , IBM X3650 biproc , 7 Gb RAM , RAID5 disks , 2 ethernet Gb ports bonded. Dovecot 1.1.11 has been compiled from scratch on the machine Thanks for any info. Hi Frank, Your system is plenty powerful - no issues there. What are your settings in the init script? I found that putting in a ulimit -n 8192 and ulimit -f 16384 prior to invoking dovecot was worthwhile on my system. I would first try tweaking these settings in a root shell and then invoke dovecot with a -c conf make sure it is picking up the right conf file. I'm sure the list will ask for the dovecot -n -c ... output as well. ---Jack Bingo ! since the begining I was modifying the wrong configuration file now everything is clear , when I modified the right file the OS instant write to the shell I haven't enough file descriptors ... Shame on me and thanks a lot Jack ! Frank -- Once upon a time, the Internet was a friendly, neighbors-helping-neighbors small town, and no one locked their doors. Now it's like an apartment in Bed-Stuy: you need three heavy duty pick-proof locks, one of those braces that goes from the lock to the floor, and bars on the windows Stewart Dean, Unix System Admin, Bard College, New York 12504 sd...@bard.edu voice: 845-758-7475, fax: 845-758-7035
Re: [Dovecot] v1.1.11 released (managesieve updated)
Timo Sirainen wrote: http://dovecot.org/releases/1.1/dovecot-1.1.11.tar.gz http://dovecot.org/releases/1.1/dovecot-1.1.11.tar.gz.sig I've refreshed the ManageSieve patch for the new release: http://www.rename-it.nl/dovecot/1.1/dovecot-1.1.11-managesieve-0.10.5.diff.gz http://www.rename-it.nl/dovecot/1.1/dovecot-1.1.11-managesieve-0.10.5.diff.gz.sig Hopefully this v1.1 release will last a few months. I hope so too :) Regards, Stephan
Re: [Dovecot] Error: Maximum number of mail processes exceeded (see max_mail_processes setting)
On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 11:36 -0500, Stewart Dean wrote: Question: Do you have to have a radically greater setting for maildir than for mbox? I would think... What sort of values are people using with both formats? Sounds like a nasty thing that could bite one in the $%# come migration from mbox to maildir No, there's pretty much no difference in fd usage between mbox and maildir. The main problem is the Dovecot master process, since it uses 1-2 fds per child process. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] pop3_lock_session question
On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 09:28 -0500, Alan Ferrency wrote: Thanks. More questions about the first patch: Is it necessary to apply this patch in 1.1, if we are using pop3_no_flag_updates = yes? Probably not. (And, is it compatible with pop3_no_flag_updates in 1.2?) Yes. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] dirsize quota in sql pass db?
On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 08:38 -0600, Ken A wrote: Timo Sirainen wrote: On Feb 4, 2009, at 11:21 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: Is there a way to return a per user dirsize quota from a passdb sql lookup? If so, what is the syntax? Yes, but only if you use prefetch userdb. Do you? If not, you'll need to return it from userdb. So, prefetch userdb is all or none. My userdb is currently /etc/passwd to keep sendmail and other legacy stuff happy. I used fs quota, but am now moving INBOX to a different (faster) partition, which breaks fs quota reporting in things like squirrelmail. Dovecot is 1.0.5 What would you suggest? Since you already have your users' passwords in SQL, why not just put the rest of the info there as well (and have it duplicated in /etc/passwd for Sendmail)? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] Error: Maximum number of mail processes exceeded (see max_mail_processes setting)
Timo Sirainen wrote: On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 11:36 -0500, Stewart Dean wrote: Question: Do you have to have a radically greater setting for maildir than for mbox? I would think... What sort of values are people using with both formats? Sounds like a nasty thing that could bite one in the $%# come migration from mbox to maildir No, there's pretty much no difference in fd usage between mbox and maildir. The main problem is the Dovecot master process, since it uses 1-2 fds per child process. It's more of a client/server activity and usage issue than anything else. Based on lsof on individual processes, there doesn't seem to be anything unique to maildir but I don't have any mbox or dbox experience. O/S tweaks are no limited to dovecot, you get into these issues with databases and webservers. To be honest, I only knew to look into these issues because of settings needed to Oracle/MySQL/Apache/etc servers. Tuning isn't limited to just ulimit. I know of some useful RHE settings, but not all. ---Jack
Re: [Dovecot] dirsize quota in sql pass db?
Timo Sirainen wrote: On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 08:38 -0600, Ken A wrote: Timo Sirainen wrote: On Feb 4, 2009, at 11:21 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: Is there a way to return a per user dirsize quota from a passdb sql lookup? If so, what is the syntax? Yes, but only if you use prefetch userdb. Do you? If not, you'll need to return it from userdb. So, prefetch userdb is all or none. My userdb is currently /etc/passwd to keep sendmail and other legacy stuff happy. I used fs quota, but am now moving INBOX to a different (faster) partition, which breaks fs quota reporting in things like squirrelmail. Dovecot is 1.0.5 What would you suggest? Since you already have your users' passwords in SQL, why not just put the rest of the info there as well (and have it duplicated in /etc/passwd for Sendmail)? That makes sense. Thanks much, Ken
Re: [Dovecot] Deferred emails on alias emails
on 2-5-2009 6:47 AM Jehan Pagès spake the following: Hi, On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.comwrote: Not sure what net neutrality has to do with this... unless you are syaing you are operating an ISP service? As for I, net neutrality is not about ISP only, but also for service providers (even if not professional like I, just for the fun). Being a neutral service means not trying to control data. Hence providing email service implies that I must do my possible so that the user receives all one's data. Spam is not data, only annoyance, so if I can remove it safely, it is OK. But expected emails are data, and if there is a risk to lose it (which is still better than using it, for instance for commercial use, or said security, but still is bad), then it is not neutral. It is becoming a judge on my users' data (deciding alone what is good or not... and maybe making mistakes). This is my opinion at least. Even for ISPs, there are a number of ways to dramatically reduce spam with pretty much zero false positives... I read some documents about such methodology and was planning to probably implement whitelister ( http://blog.madism.org/index.php/2006/03/25/79-debianorg-and-spam The concept looks interesting because it is not just a stupid email blocker as using RBL which can blocks a lot of real email. Just have a look to bad email provider as hotmail or Yahoo! on which I met many people having issues of unreceived emails. These are what I call pretty unneutral service which decides that such or that small server is probably bad, without knowing it) on my server... But first I need to have my server fully functional, and currently I am first fighting with dspam. I make stuffs in the right order and whitelister (or other systems) is the next step. ;-) ASSP (and now ASSPS) is a great tool... http://apps.sourceforge.net/mediawiki/assp/ I will have a look at this, thanks. Just the website on such a complicated topic does not say much about the methodology. :-) Forwarding OBVIOUS spam is simply passing on what should be your problem to others. I am right when you are 100% sure, once again. In any other cases, it is a question of point of view as I said. Many users (I included) would consider that it is not the service provider issue to decide what is good or bad for me. Regards, Jehan But if you relay any spam and get blacklisted for it, you will be the one that suffers. The blacklists don't care what your point of view is or if you generated the spam or just relayed it. Then everyone on your server will suffer for the actions of another. That is why ISP's try and block as much spam as they can. Society is full of entities that decide what is good for you or not. The Government decides that driving too fast is dangerous, so they set speed limits. Someone might get some tainted food from a manufacturer, and they are stopped from shipping anymore goods until it can be determined what happened. Drinking and driving is dangerous to others, so you are not allowed to do it. Spam is a bane to the normal flow of e-mail, and is considered by some as theft of service since you are stealing someone elses paid for bandwidth to send the junk to people that don't want it anyway. I stop a lot of spam before it ever enters or leaves my servers. It is just good practice, no matter how Libertarian my users might be. Your servers are yours, and if someone wants to use your server to relay mail, they should have to also follow good practice. If your server sends me junk, it will get blacklisted. I will not look at the messages and see if they came from someone else, and most other systems won't either. You forward it, you are considered just as guilty. If your friend robs a bank, and you are just driving the car you still go to jail with him, don't you? The police won't let you go because it isn't your problem. Rant over! -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Dovecot] dovecot Digest, Vol 70, Issue 16
on 2-4-2009 12:09 PM Anthony Davis spake the following: Please remove me from the mailing list, i have tried a number of times to un-subscribe, but i still keep getting emails... Tony On 4 Feb 2009, at 19:35, dovecot-requ...@dovecot.org wrote: dovecot@dovecot.org What did you try, so we can help you? List-Unsubscribe: http://dovecot.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dovecot, mailto:dovecot-requ...@dovecot.org?subject=unsubscribe is in the headers of every message, and one of those should work. -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Dovecot] Deferred emails on alias emails
Hi, On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Scott Silva ssi...@sgvwater.com wrote: But if you relay any spam and get blacklisted for it, you will be the one that suffers. The blacklists don't care what your point of view is or if you generated the spam or just relayed it. Then everyone on your server will suffer for the actions of another. That is why ISP's try and block as much spam as they can. Society is full of entities that decide what is good for you or not. Yes that's true and for many of them, I really don't agree that it is the way to do. In some dictatorial country, they would say that sending an email criticizing your governement is bas (is it spam?! Maybe for these governments), and then you would go to jail. This is not because things are this way that they are the right way. The Government decides that driving too fast is dangerous, so they set speed limits. Someone might get some tainted food from a manufacturer, and they are stopped from shipping anymore goods until it can be determined what happened. Drinking and driving is dangerous to others, so you are not allowed to do it. Spam is a bane to the normal flow of e-mail, and is considered by some as theft of service since you are stealing someone elses paid for bandwidth to send the junk to people that don't want it anyway. Really, I try, but I cannot see the parallel between just forwarding messages (as I was asked to when setting this alias!) and getting other people's live in danger. I stop a lot of spam before it ever enters or leaves my servers. It is just good practice, no matter how Libertarian my users might be. Your servers are yours, and if someone wants to use your server to relay mail, they should have to also follow good practice. If your server sends me junk, it will get blacklisted. I will not look at the messages and see if they came from someone else, and most other systems won't either. You forward it, you are considered just as guilty. I won't forward spam to you, I already told you. This is just an email alias for a friend. It is just a email translation for a single external email which has been explicitely asked. My smtp server is not an open relay for any organized spammer who would like to forwards hundreds of spams to the world... Nobody can use my server for spamming the world, so neither your server. If your friend robs a bank, and you are just driving the car you still go to jail with him, don't you? The police won't let you go because it isn't your problem. No because you participate actively to the robbery. But let's just say that you are a taxi that passes by and you don't know that the guy is a robber and has a bank's money in his bag because you are not here to investigate on all your customers nor to look in their bag. As long as the guy don't ask you to drive fast over speed limitation or to try to flee the cops, then you have no reason to be suspicious, do you? Then you just drive your customer and leaves him his intimacy. If ever the cops ask to stop your car (then the taximan just stops), you should not be sent to jail. And really you should have nothing to be blamed for in such situation. You provide a service: getting people from one place to another, and you just do it when you are asked to. The reason of this all is that this is not your job to spy on anyone, trying to guess if they do bad things, or whatever. This is among the worse that could happen in a society and results in a society of denunciation, where you cannot trust anyone (not even your family or friends), where everyone spies each other, etc. Of course all of this change if you are sure that the guy is a robber (for instance, you saw him rob the bank with his gun for instance). Then you would not drive him (but not because this is the law for my own, but just because it is bad) of course. That's the same for spam. If ever you are sure, of course, don't send. Still as I say again and again: the problem is to be sure! If you have even a slight uncertaincy, then what should you do? Refuse him the lift? Maybe he was running because his wife is going to have her baby and he needs to go back fast. Or he is going to miss his fly or his job meeting... You don't know and that's not because you think this guy look strange for instance that you should refuse him in your car. This leads also to bad behavior (if one can accept this, then one can accept to refuse people on liking their face or not...). Rant over! Anyway I have the impression that we may never agree... I don't know if we should continue this discussion on this list. ;-) Jehan
Re: [Dovecot] Deferred emails on alias emails
On 2/5/2009, Jehan Pagès (jehan.marmott...@gmail.com) wrote: I won't forward spam to you, I already told you. This is just an email alias for a friend. It is just a email translation for a single external email which has been explicitely asked. My smtp server is not an open relay for any organized spammer who would like to forwards hundreds of spams to the world... Nobody can use my server for spamming the world, so neither your server. Um.. did you or did you not say: In my case, most of these messages were forwarded to the gmail servers, and as there were many spams unfortunately in these emails forwarded (and it's not my server's purpose to remove the spams when forwarding), Did you mis-speak? ... as there were many spams... means that your server DID forward 'many spams' - and you even said it got your server temporarily blacklisted... Its your server, do what you want... just don't be surprised when people respond accordingly. -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] v1.1.11 released
Timo Sirainen skrev: Hopefully this v1.1 release will last a few months. Builing on OpenBSD 4.4 (which has an ancient compiler, now I know), I got some warnings. There is one warning not related to this compiler's pointer handling which is worth considering I think: maildir-sync-index.c:295: warning: `j' might be used uninitialized in this function In function maildir_sync_mail_keywords, j is assumed to be initialized to 0 I think. It is used in line 339 in the for statement. Changing to for (i = j = 0; removed this warning, and removed my doubts :-) There is a similar warning for mailbox-list-fs-iter.c, but as far as I can tell the warning is unjustified? mailbox-list-fs-iter.c:483: warning: `real_path' might be used uninitialized in this function /Peter -- Peter Lindgren http://www.norrskenkonsult.com
Re: [Dovecot] Deferred emails on alias emails
Hi, On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:33 PM, Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.comwrote: Um.. did you or did you not say: In my case, most of these messages were forwarded to the gmail servers, and as there were many spams unfortunately in these emails forwarded (and it's not my server's purpose to remove the spams when forwarding), Did you mis-speak? ... as there were many spams... means that your server DID forward 'many spams' - and you even said it got your server temporarily blacklisted... Yes but the issue was only this one time because I sent in one single row several days of emails on an account which exists for years and years (so unfortunately my friend has now many spams in several days, as well as many real excepted emails, just as I) because they were blocked before on my misconfigured new email server. That's not going to happen every day that I will suddenly forward all the emails of several days for my friend. Its your server, do what you want... just don't be surprised when people respond accordingly. Thanks for the concern, but don't worry, I take all the necessary actions. I just don't trust spam systems because they are not reliable, except for finale destination when they can be checked (that's why I install dspam for locale users using IMAP), that's all. But I am looking for other more reliable methods (cf. for instance the whitelister program...). Regards, Jehan
[Dovecot] NFS - inotify vs kqueue
Hi, I've seen some chatter on NFS boards about kqueue being more reliable than inotify when used in NFSv3 and NFSv2. The chatter is a bit old so I don't know if it is true anymore. Anyone have pro/con experience with dovecot on the inotify/kqueue question when using NFS storage? I realize that kqueue is probably a bit slower and causes some delay with IDLE. Also, it may not really make any difference which is why I ask the question. ---Jack
Re: [Dovecot] Deferred emails on alias emails
On 2/5/2009, Jehan Pagès (jehan.marmott...@gmail.com) wrote: Yes but the issue was only this one time because I sent in one single row several days of emails on an account which exists for years and years (so unfortunately my friend has now many spams in several days, as well as many real excepted emails, just as I) because they were blocked before on my misconfigured new email server. That's not going to happen every day that I will suddenly forward all the emails of several days for my friend. Doesn't really matter. If servers see you sending enough even OCCASIONAL spam, you will EVENTUALLY get on blacklists - and some of those are not easy to get off of. AGAIN... it is your server, do what you want, but don't be surprised when other admins act accordingly and BLOCK you. I think, like Zed, this thread is dead. -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] v1.1.11 released
On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 21:59 +0100, Peter Lindgren wrote: Timo Sirainen skrev: Hopefully this v1.1 release will last a few months. Builing on OpenBSD 4.4 (which has an ancient compiler, now I know), I got some warnings. There is one warning not related to this compiler's pointer handling which is worth considering I think: maildir-sync-index.c:295: warning: `j' might be used uninitialized in this function :( I actually fixed this already in v1.2 tree, but for some reason not in v1.1 tree. But since this is only a problem when using 26 keywords and that had already been broken for years, I don't think I'll bother releasing a new version just to fix that. Anyway, fixed by: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.1/rev/4736327a8740 There is a similar warning for mailbox-list-fs-iter.c, but as far as I can tell the warning is unjustified? mailbox-list-fs-iter.c:483: warning: `real_path' might be used uninitialized in this function Yes, that can't really happen. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] NFS - inotify vs kqueue
On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 13:08 -0800, Jack Stewart wrote: Anyone have pro/con experience with dovecot on the inotify/kqueue question when using NFS storage? Inotify is for Linux, kqueue is for BSDs. Right? So I'd think there are a lot of other issues if you're switching between Linux/BSDs.. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] NFS - inotify vs kqueue
Timo Sirainen wrote: On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 13:08 -0800, Jack Stewart wrote: Anyone have pro/con experience with dovecot on the inotify/kqueue question when using NFS storage? Inotify is for Linux, kqueue is for BSDs. Right? So I'd think there are a lot of other issues if you're switching between Linux/BSDs.. That would be a problem :-) Oops. Looks like I need to increase the priority of NFSv4 on the test queue for these machines. ---Jack
[Dovecot] The 'dbox' Format
I'd like to give the dbox format a try, but I could not find any information on how to enable it. There's information on how to set mail_location for the Maildir and mbox formats in the wiki and also in the commented configuration file, but how to set it for dbox is strangely missing. I took a guess with 'mail_location = dbox:~/dbox', but that didn't work, so it's probably not the right way. Also, the version of Dovecot that Debian installed was 1.0.15, which is kinda old. Should there any serious reasons why I should manually install a newer version if I'm going to use dbox? __ Deutschlands größte Online-Videothek schenkt Ihnen 12.000 Videos!* http://entertainment.web.de/de/entertainment/maxdome/index.html
Re: [Dovecot] The 'dbox' Format
Timo Sirainen wrote: On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 22:42 +0100, Alexander Beisig wrote: I'd like to give the dbox format a try, but I could not find any information on how to enable it. There's information on how to set mail_location for the Maildir and mbox formats in the wiki and also in the commented configuration file, but how to set it for dbox is strangely missing. I took a guess with 'mail_location = dbox:~/dbox', but that didn't work, so it's probably not the right way. That's correct. Also, the version of Dovecot that Debian installed was 1.0.15, which is kinda old. Should there any serious reasons why I should manually install a newer version if I'm going to use dbox? v1.0's dbox is completely different from what v1.1 has. It's also not compiled in by default in v1.0. So don't even try using it. Ok thanks, so I downloaded the recent 1.1.11 release. But I still don't know how to enable the dbox format. I think dovecot-example.conf should explain how to enable it, unless you really don't want people to use this format. Pt! Schon vom neuen WEB.DE MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.produkte.web.de/messenger/?did=3123
[Dovecot] Info regarding conversion of mbox to maildir
When I finally decide to convert to maildir, will I have to set up namespaces during the conversion, or will dovecot figure out where everything is by itself? Should I set up deliver to go to maildir/ globally, or per user? I have considered using the convert plugin, if there are not a lot of negatives. -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [Dovecot] The 'dbox' Format
On Feb 5, 2009, at 6:43 PM, Alexander Beisig wrote: mail_location = dbox:~/dbox That's correct. .. Ok thanks, so I downloaded the recent 1.1.11 release. But I still don't know how to enable the dbox format. I think dovecot- example.conf should explain how to enable it, unless you really don't want people to use this format. You had it correct originally.
Re: [Dovecot] Info regarding conversion of mbox to maildir
On Feb 5, 2009, at 6:56 PM, Scott Silva wrote: When I finally decide to convert to maildir, will I have to set up namespaces during the conversion, or will dovecot figure out where everything is by itself? Just adding namespaces won't really help with anything, except unless you want to use both maildir and mbox at the same time. Should I set up deliver to go to maildir/ globally, or per user? Depends on if you convert everything at once or one user at a time. Or you can just use convert plugin with deliver and then you don't have to worry about it. I have considered using the convert plugin, if there are not a lot of negatives. I don't know if anyone has really used it to do the conversion, but I don't see why it wouldn't work. :) The main negative is that it doesn't preserve message UIDs, so IMAP clients will re-download the messages and if you have any POP3 users that store messages on server they'll get duplicate messages.
[Dovecot] ¿DC won't start? leaked file fd 5:
Hi Gents, (apologizes, new here...) I didn't find any hint on G**gle nor in the Dovecot archieve (maybe due to the lack of a search function :), so: I installed Doovecot, but can't get it going. The logfile states: mail.info dovecot: Dovecot v1.0.15 starting up mail.err dovecot: auth(default): Panic: Leaked file fd 5: dev 0.10 inode 3 mail.err dovecot: Auth process died too early - shutting down I tried many obscure things to recover, but had no luck so far. As long i am just guessing around (auth? dev 0.10?? maybe SSL config?), i have no clue what happens here :(. To make things more interesting: the installation lives on an embedded device (xscale, aka arm w/4MB RAM), where are no extended debug features available (like ltrace, ldd,...), and no newer packages (if exist) available. Tried so far: * uninstall (ipkg remove) * rm'd all files listed in the package description + /var/run/dc/* * reinstall (ipkg install) * changed the config file (in many ways... but what??) The init-script does mainly /opt/sbin/dovecot, so i tried that command on the CLI(bash) to be sure no script mangles fd's around. echo $? gives 0 then, but no DC process is running- log messages as above. I have no clue what to do abt that- where's the point?? Can this hopefully be done whithout installing the complete gcc toolchain and compiling a newer version from source, but by just adapting the config? 8-| Any helpful hints appreciated!, acend -- -- Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger01
Re: [Dovecot] ¿DC won't start? leaked file fd 5:
On Feb 6, 2009, at 12:48 AM, mathe...@gmx.net wrote: mail.info dovecot: Dovecot v1.0.15 starting up mail.err dovecot: auth(default): Panic: Leaked file fd 5: dev 0.10 inode 3 This happens only when Dovecot has been configured with --enable-devel- checks (or was it --with-debug in v1.0? I'm not sure anymore). The easiest way to avoid the problem is to not do that. To make things more interesting: the installation lives on an embedded device (xscale, aka arm w/4MB RAM), where are no extended debug features available (like ltrace, ldd,...), and no newer packages (if exist) available. The problem is probably related to running in a special environment which uses some extra fds for some things (possibly a bug or maybe a feature, who knows).
Re: [Dovecot] ¿DC won't start? leaked file fd 5:
Hi Timo, mail.info dovecot: Dovecot v1.0.15 starting up mail.err dovecot: auth(default): Panic: Leaked file fd 5: dev 0.10 inode 3 This happens only when Dovecot has been configured with --enable-devel- checks (or was it --with-debug in v1.0? I'm not sure anymore). The easiest way to avoid the problem is to not do that. Well, I read that on the net. But the goal was to get it going *without* recompiling... please! :) The problem is probably related to running in a special environment which uses some extra fds for some things (possibly a bug or maybe a feature, who knows) Maybe. But as i got it from an official repo http://www.dovecot.org/releases/1.0/dovecot-1.0.15.tar.gz, the thing obviously works for some folks... i'm afraid, they just configured DC somewhat sensefullier (while not documenting this anywhere). Ideas from the profs (you)? -- Pt! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger01
Re: [Dovecot] Expire plugin does not work
On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 12:17:05 -0500 Timo Sirainen t...@iki.fi wrote: On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 11:27 +0100, Nicolas Letellier wrote: Info: us...@domain.tld/Trash: stop, expire time in future: Wed Feb 4 21:00:50 2009 Why this message? I have 3 mailboxes, and the message appears only with this mailbox. The 2 others mailbox have mails into Trash and Junk folders. And the mail are older than 2 days. An ls -lcs say it. Dovecot tracks the timestamp when the message was copied to Trash, not necessary its ctime. So you probably copied the message to Trash on Feb 3 21:00:50, which is why it'll get expunged at Feb 4 21:00:50. But, now, we are 6 feb, and I have these messages: -rw--- 1 dovecot dovecot 3822 Feb 2 11:11 1233569469.M275631P48216.helm.nicoelro.net,S=3822,W=3945:2,S -rw--- 1 dovecot dovecot 3004 Feb 2 15:40 1233585799.M730005P46882.helm.nicoelro.net,W=3078,S=3004:2,S -rw--- 1 dovecot dovecot 3056 Feb 2 16:16 1233587786.M676156P51401.helm.nicoelro.net,S=3056,W=3132:2,S Sincerlery, I don't understand! This night, I had: Info: mailb...@domain.fr/Trash: no messages left Info: mailb...@domain.net/Junk: no messages left Info: mailb...@domain.net/Junk: no messages left Info: mailb...@domain.net/Trash: stop, expire time in future: Fri Feb 6 19:43:55 2009 I can swear you I have new messages in Junk in mailbox1! After, I ran command without --test, it deleted nothing... I ran a command with --test and I had: Info: mailb...@domain.net/Trash: stop, expire time in future: Fri Feb 6 19:43:55 2009 The 3 other messages have been deleted. I don't know why. I don't know why expired mail was not deleted... In a mailbox1, I have this into Junk/cur directory: 4 -rw--- 1 dovecot dovecot 3822 Feb 2 13:39 1233569469.M275631P48216.***.***.net,S=3822,W=3945:2,S 4 -rw--- 1 dovecot dovecot 3004 Feb 2 15:43 1233585799.M730005P46882.***.***.net,W=3078,S=3004:2,S 4 -rw--- 1 dovecot dovecot 3056 Feb 2 17:49 1233587786.M676156P51401.***.***.net,S=3056,W=3132:2,S 4 -rw--- 1 dovecot dovecot 3732 Feb 2 17:49 1233592892.M701994P52459.***.***.net,S=3732,W=3823:2,S We are Feb 4, and these message are always here. No informations with mail_debug, or with --test parameter.These messages were arrived Feb 2, and they might have this date in dovecot.index.cache... Was expire plugin enabled then? If it wasn't, it didn't add them to its database so it doesn't know about them. Yes, expire plugin was enabled. I delete ALL my spams and ALL my Trash mails. And after, I activated the expire plugin. # 1.1.10: /usr/local/etc/dovecot.conf # OS: FreeBSD 6.3-RELEASE-p4 i386 ufs syslog_facility: local6 protocols: imap imaps managesieve ssl_cert_file: /etc/ssl/mail/mail.nicoelro.net.cert ssl_key_file: /etc/ssl/mail/mail.nicoelro.net.key disable_plaintext_auth: no login_dir: /var/run/dovecot/login login_executable(default): /usr/local/libexec/dovecot/imap-login login_executable(imap): /usr/local/libexec/dovecot/imap-login login_executable(managesieve): /usr/local/libexec/dovecot/managesieve-login login_user: dovecot-auth login_greeting: NicoElro.Net Mail Server login_processes_count: 2 verbose_proctitle: yes first_valid_uid: 143 last_valid_uid: 143 first_valid_gid: 143 last_valid_gid: 143 mail_access_groups: mail mail_location: maildir:/var/mail/vmail/%u/ mail_debug(default): no mail_debug(imap): no mail_debug(managesieve): yes mail_executable(default): /usr/local/libexec/dovecot/imap mail_executable(imap): /usr/local/libexec/dovecot/imap mail_executable(managesieve): /usr/local/libexec/dovecot/managesieve mail_plugins(default): quota imap_quota mail_log expire mail_plugins(imap): quota imap_quota mail_log expire mail_plugins(managesieve): mail_plugin_dir(default): /usr/local/lib/dovecot/imap mail_plugin_dir(imap): /usr/local/lib/dovecot/imap mail_plugin_dir(managesieve): /usr/local/lib/dovecot/managesieve imap_client_workarounds(default): delay-newmail outlook-idle netscape-eoh tb-extra-mailbox-sep imap_client_workarounds(imap): delay-newmail outlook-idle netscape-eoh tb-extra-mailbox-sep imap_client_workarounds(managesieve): sieve(default): sieve(imap): sieve(managesieve): ~/dovecot.sieve auth default: mechanisms: plain login master_user_separator: * passdb: driver: passwd-file args: /usr/local/etc/dovecot.masterusers master: yes passdb: driver: sql args: /usr/local/etc/dovecot/dovecot-sql.conf userdb: driver: sql args: /usr/local/etc/dovecot/dovecot-sql.conf socket: type: listen client: path: /var/spool/postfix/private/auth mode: 432 user: postfix master: path: /var/run/dovecot/auth-master mode: 432 user: dovecot group: mail plugin: quota: maildir quota_rule: *:storage=1000M quota_rule2: Trash:storage=50M quota_warning: storage=80%% /usr/home/scripts/mail_quota-warning.sh 80 quota_warning2: storage=90%%
