Re: Failback mailboxes?
❦ 14 août 2017 09:24 +0300, Dag Nygren : > Have been using Fedora as my dovecot server for > some time and am struggling with systemd > at every update. > Fedora insists on setting > ProtectSystem=full in both dovecot.service and postfix.service > at every update of the packages. > > This makes my mailstore which is in /usr/local/var/mail > Read-only. > > And this makes the incoming emails delivered through > dovecot-lda disappear into /dev/null until I notice > the problem and we lose incoming emails. > > My question is: > Is there any way to set up a failback mailstore > for these occasions? > > PS! I really hate systemd - Destroys the UNIX way of > doing things with a heavy axe In /etc/systemd/system/dovecot.service.d/10-mailboxes.conf, put: [Service] ReadWritePaths=/usr/local/var/mail Same for Postfix. This won't be overwritten on updates. -- Don't stop at one bug. - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
Re: [Dovecot] Released 1.0.rc31
OoO Lors de la soirée naissante du lundi 09 avril 2007, vers 17:03,
"Daniel L. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait:
> It would be quite convenient to have support for multiple SSL server
> certificates, based on remote IP address. When a single IMAP server
> supports both LAN clients and WAN clients, at times either or both the
> domain names or server names may vary - and then a single server
> certificate results in some clients receiving SSL warnings.
Did you try AltSubjectName in your certificate ? I didn't find a current
client that fails to recognize this, yet.
--
panic("esp: what could it be... I wonder...");
2.2.16 /usr/src/linux/drivers/scsi/esp.c
Re: [Dovecot] Multiple delivery with LDA+sieve
OoO Vers la fin de l'après-midi du dimanche 25 mars 2007, vers 16:22, John Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait: >> I guess this duplicate checking could be done, but I wouldn't want >> it enabled by default. > You've got to be careful anyway, these so-called duplicates often come > via different routes (e.g. directly and via a mailing list), may have > been processed differently over those routes (e.g. have had > attachments stripped), can't be trusted to have useful addressee > fields, and won't necessarily arrive in the same order every time, so > any rules for de-duplicating really have to be left to the mailbox > owner and can't safely be applied server-wide. By delivering the mail to the same mailbox, the mailbox owner should want de-duplication. We won't de-duplicate mails that are delivered to different mailboxes. I will look at the duplicate database when I manage to get some time. :) -- BOFH excuse #163: no "any" key on keyboard
[Dovecot] Multiple delivery with LDA+sieve
Hi ! I am still a bit annoyed with the way that Sieve plugin handles multiple delivery into the same folder. For reference : http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2007-January/019029.html Summary : When a same message (same message-id) is to be delivered twice into the same mailbox, it is delivered twice while I think that the second one should be discarded. Here are a few test cases : - you subscribe to a few mailing lists on topic "X" and deliver all mails from those mailing lists in the same folder. You get twice the mails that are crossposted. - you subscribe to one mailing list and read it regulary so you don't care of receiving messages from this mailing list (you are in Cc when someone answers) in your INBOX. You match on To or Cc to put everything in the same folder. You get messages twice when you are put personally in Cc. - you place a forward from one account to two of your accounts (one is keeping backup, the other don't but delivers faster). You receive all messages twice. With procmail, I handle those (real) cases with formail. I can't with Sieve. I don't see any interest in receiving the same message twice into the same mailbox. Is it possible to maintain a list of recent message-id and mailbox couples to avoid to deliver again a message to the same mailbox ? -- Terminate input by end-of-file or marker, not by count. - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
