--
Jesse Norell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
Keep hitting enter on the Subject line, and firing off blank
emails... sorry.
I'm about to post an update to the autoconf setup which handles
the endian.h check and FreeBSD's lack of crypt.h via the configure
script, as well as a few misc. fixes. Ryan looked over it and thought
it loo
Hi Jesse,
Thanks for all your work. :)
Did you made the changes regarding the pbdp in all the driver files?
Could you add them to your next email?
Thanks,
Eelco
On vrijdag, maa 7, 2003, at 19:13 Europe/Amsterdam, Jesse Norell wrote:
Hello,
Keep hitting enter on the Subject line, and firi
Hello Eelco,
Yes, both mysql and pbsql are updated. I'll get those patches
combined and send it here shortly.
Thanks,
Jesse
Original Message
From: Eelco van Beek - IC&S
To: dbmail@dbmail.org
Subject: Re: [Dbmail] autoconf update
Sent: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 21:48:34 +0100
&
stions/problems/etc.
Thanks,
Jesse
---- Original Message ----
From: Eelco van Beek - IC&S
To: dbmail@dbmail.org
Subject: Re: [Dbmail] autoconf update
Sent: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 21:48:34 +0100
> Hi Jesse,
>
> Thanks for all your work. :)
> Did you made the changes regarding the pbdp
e config file, and that's been more appropriately
put in dbmail.h, as more than one program need to know that.
This patch is against dbmail 1.1, which was still the same as cvs
as of this morning. Hollar with questions/problems/etc.
Thanks,
Jesse
---- Original Message ----
From: Eelco van
cluded
(ie. don't apply the other patch, just this one).
Thanks,
Jesse
Original Message
From: Roel Rozendaal - IC&S
To: dbmail@dbmail.org
Subject: Re: [Dbmail] autoconf update [PATCH]
Sent: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:31:54 +0100
> Hi Jesse,
>
> the patches you send do not a
oel Rozendaal - IC&S
To: dbmail@dbmail.org
Subject: Re: [Dbmail] autoconf update [PATCH]
Sent: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:31:54 +0100
Hi Jesse,
the patches you send do not apply straight away - could you check them
against current cvs? thanks!
roel
Jesse Norell heeft op vrijdag, 7 maa 2003 om 2
/config.cache
buildtools/config.log
buildtools/configure
buildtools/configure.in
Thanks,
Jesse
Original Message
From: Roel Rozendaal - IC&S
To: dbmail@dbmail.org
Subject: Re: [Dbmail] autoconf update [PATCH]
Sent: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 17:08:01 +0100
> missed that -p1, sorry :-)
>
Hello All,
I've been running dbmail 1.1 + this patch for about a week now on Debian
SPARC and MySQL InnoDB with no problems. I'm useing horde/imp and
Mozilla, both through imap. I found that adding a index on
messages.internal_date helps when listing a mailbox by date in
horde/imp, which uses
Blake wrote:
I'm going to try something, and please don't everyone hate me for
suggesting it. I'm thinking about using dbmail without the messageblk
table, and storing the messages in files on the file system. It seems
like a good idea to me, please tell me why it is a bad idea.
Your idea is
I looked at the fact sheet for powermail, it looks interesting, but it
is missing what I think is the heart of dbmail; the IMAP server. I bet
it would only take a few tweaks to get dbmail-imapd to read messages
from files. I've got this sneaking suspicion it will be faster that way.
Of course,
.org
Subject: Re: [Dbmail] autoconf update [PATCH]
Sent: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 17:08:01 +0100
missed that -p1, sorry :-)
patches have been applied & committed
regards roel
Jesse Norell heeft op maandag, 17 maa 2003 om 16:59 (Europe/Amsterdam)
het volgende geschreven:
Hello Roel,
I just gra
On Tue, 2003-03-18 at 03:11, Blake wrote:
> I looked at the fact sheet for powermail, it looks interesting, but it
> is missing what I think is the heart of dbmail; the IMAP server. I bet
> it would only take a few tweaks to get dbmail-imapd to read messages
> from files. I've got this sneaking
Yeah, I dislike current IMAP servers exactly for the reasons you list
here. I think one file per message is the only reasonable mode of
operation. It would be best to tune the message store file system for
small inode size, and avoid the problem of large directories by storing
the messages in a
Sounds like an Exchange Server. :-)
Curtis
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, Blake wrote:
> Yeah, I dislike current IMAP servers exactly for the reasons you list
> here. I think one file per message is the only reasonable mode of
> operation. It would be best to tune the message store file system for
> s
Oh man, I think I'm going to be sick!
Curtis Maurand wrote:
Sounds like an Exchange Server. :-)
Curtis
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, Blake wrote:
...
This is really like going back to basic.
DBmail's data model is not perfect the way it is right now. At
insertion time the data should be stored structured, this would make
any daemon for mail retrieval and storage faster than any filesystem
solution. We're not there yet since this will need
Yes you're right, it was a completely personal flight of fancy, that
wouldn't apply to the general community. It would tear out some of the
great practicality of dbmail. You guys have convinced me that it's not
something I want to do right now anyway.
I'm going to start with creating a headers
I don't know if you've ever connected to an exchange server with a
straight imap client. I have. An Exchange server is nothing more than a
big IMAP server with an LDAP server built in. Even the calendar is
nothing but messages. I did notice that there was some similarity in the
format of th
20 matches
Mail list logo
