Re: Ubuntu package - Was: Re: doveadm-server protocol change?

[Heiko Schlittermann]

Hi Patrick,

Patrick Domack  (Mi 01 Jun 2016 02:22:17 CEST):
> Those are my packages. I try to track each release, and bug fixed.
…
> I do consider them stable enough for other people to use, but again, your at
> my mercy. (But these are what I use on my production systems so)

Thank you for your response, we're using your packages now in a
production ready environment I'll contact you in case of any issues.

(The environment uses a directors/backends setup.)

Best regards from Dresden/Germany
Viele Grüße aus Dresden
Heiko Schlittermann
-- 
 SCHLITTERMANN.de  internet & unix support -
 Heiko Schlittermann, Dipl.-Ing. (TU) - {fon,fax}: +49.351.802998{1,3} -
 gnupg encrypted messages are welcome --- key ID: F69376CE -
 ! key id 7CBF764A and 972EAC9F are revoked since 2015-01  -


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Ubuntu package - Was: Re: doveadm-server protocol change?

[Patrick Domack]

Those are my packages. I try to track each release, and bug fixed.

But since those are mine, I'm really concerned with stability as it  
affects my enviroment. Mainly mdbox/maildir with gzip, at this present  
time.


If someone lets me know of any issues, I will fix and adjust for it,  
but I'm not doing full scale stability testing. It's just the straight  
ubuntu package, with it swapped out for 2.2.24+fixes, and other  
adjustments as needed.


I do consider them stable enough for other people to use, but again,  
your at my mercy. (But these are what I use on my production systems so)


As far as the init scripts goes, it's the same as what the dovecot  
packages as shipped by ubuntu for 16.04 does it. I have not looked  
into it much myself yet, other than it functions. I only have one  
16.04 dovecot system currently.



Quoting Heiko Schlittermann :


Hi,

Peter Chiochetti  (Di 31 Mai 2016 10:31:50 CEST):

Not having installed any of the two, I can say, as a Ubuntu user:
In ppa "/etc/init.d/dovecot" is a symlink to "/lib/init/upstart-job"


The 2.2.24 on 16.04 installs both

/etc/init.d/dovecot
/lib/systemd/system/dovecot.service


While xi packages places its own init script there.


The xi packages I didn't check yet.

Best regards from Dresden/Germany
Viele Grüße aus Dresden
Heiko Schlittermann
--
 SCHLITTERMANN.de  internet & unix support -
 Heiko Schlittermann, Dipl.-Ing. (TU) - {fon,fax}: +49.351.802998{1,3} -
 gnupg encrypted messages are welcome --- key ID: F69376CE -
 ! key id 7CBF764A and 972EAC9F are revoked since 2015-01  -

Re: Ubuntu package - Was: Re: doveadm-server protocol change?

[Heiko Schlittermann]

Hi,

Peter Chiochetti  (Di 31 Mai 2016 10:31:50 CEST):
> Not having installed any of the two, I can say, as a Ubuntu user:
> In ppa "/etc/init.d/dovecot" is a symlink to "/lib/init/upstart-job"

The 2.2.24 on 16.04 installs both

/etc/init.d/dovecot
/lib/systemd/system/dovecot.service

> While xi packages places its own init script there.

The xi packages I didn't check yet.

Best regards from Dresden/Germany
Viele Grüße aus Dresden
Heiko Schlittermann
-- 
 SCHLITTERMANN.de  internet & unix support -
 Heiko Schlittermann, Dipl.-Ing. (TU) - {fon,fax}: +49.351.802998{1,3} -
 gnupg encrypted messages are welcome --- key ID: F69376CE -
 ! key id 7CBF764A and 972EAC9F are revoked since 2015-01  -


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Ubuntu package - Was: Re: doveadm-server protocol change?

[Peter Chiochetti]

…

You can get packages from http://xi.dovecot.fi/debian/,  if it helps. The HTTP 
API should not suffer from the username problem.


Thank you. I just used ppa:patrickdk/production, but probably will try
the xi.dovecot.fi packages.


The question is, which of these locations is more trustworthy in the
sense of 'production ready'?

Heiko


I'd consider xi.dovecot.fi more reliable myself.

AKi



Not having installed any of the two, I can say, as a Ubuntu user:

In ppa "/etc/init.d/dovecot" is a symlink to "/lib/init/upstart-job"

While xi packages places its own init script there.

Curiously, dpkg on installation seems not to unlink the existing one 
first, but overwrite it with the new contents, thereby destroying 
upstart -- This happened to me last year, I noticed early :)


Last checked in 2.2.22 xi package as seen from the contents, did that 
change?


Possible workaround: remove the stock init file link ahead of installation?

--
peter