Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:34:20AM -0500, Shane Hickey wrote:
>>
>> Well, I removed the ~/mbox file, and now all the mail goes to
>> /var/mail/username, which is to be expected, however I can't get it to
>> deliver to ~/Maildir. Is there a config file for uw-imapd that I n
Mark Ferlatte schrieb:
> Kjetil Kjernsmo said on Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 11:03:27PM +0200:
>> How about memtest...? This box is under some load, but usually not too
>> bad, would it be a good idea to run it overnight? How would I go about
>> to test a much as possible of my memory with it?
>
> It w
Kjetil Kjernsmo schrieb:
> These segfaults started to appear, and I found there were little I could
> do to repair it. Eventually, it seems like more and more programs got
> this problem, and finally I couldn't log on anymore on Sunday evening.
>
> In the server room, I booted the machine with
Russell Shaw wrote:
> Kjetil Kjernsmo wrote:
>> Hi all!
>>
>> Last night, the cronjob on my main server reported this:
> ...
>> So, there is a segfault there too, but I guess this really doesn't imply
>> there is a trojan, but that this is a consequence of the same problem
>> as above.
>>
>> An
Louie Miranda wrote:
> minicom sends me this..
>
>
>> minicom <- enter
> Router>
> Router>rpcproxy1srv login: ATZ
You have to configure minicom not to send modem dial strings. It assumes
that it talks to a modem per default.
And please trim you mails - also top posting is considered bad.
Chee
Peter Christensen schrieb:
> But recently I wanted to FTP a photo to the "personal web space" that my ISP
> provides. I've been unable to do this, and have not found any information on
> what is going wrong. I wonder if some servers are set up so that only
> Windows applications can access th
martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Juri Haberland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.08.22.0049 +0200]:
>> Generally I recommend to use mdadm, because it is more flexible
>> and actively maintained by Neil Brown, the Linux SoftwareRAID guy.
>
> Okay, I will check it ou
martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Juri Haberland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.08.21.1605 +0200]:
>> Well, I don't know about ext3, but my RAID5 device, which I created
>> without any special commandline parameters, looks like this:
>>
>> md7
martin f krafft wrote:
> I would still appreciate comments to the following:
>
>> > Try with the defaults values for chunk size, algorithm and ext3 stride.
>>
>> Which are? I could not see any.
Did you read my other mail? With defaults I mean that what you get, if
you don't use any special comm
martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Juri Haberland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.08.21.1034 +0200]:
>> The first thing I notice is that you compare two different
>> filesystems: reiserfs and ext3. It is a known fact that reiserfs
>> is in most workloads *much* faster than
martin f krafft wrote:
> I set up a Software RAID System previously. It contains four 120Gb
> harddrives, 8 partitions on each, with the forth drive being used as
> a spare:
[SNIP]
> As you can see, the first is a simple RAID 1, all the others are
> RAID 5. All have a chunk size of 32 and an ext3
Joris Huizer wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I've got a small question - the other day I saw
> somebody said something about ext3 not needing a fsck
> every 20 boots... and I decided to start using a ext3
> filesystem instead of ext2 :-)
Actually, you will still get the fsck every 20 boots or after
MJM wrote:
> My first practical, baby-step concern is if I will be able to maintain my
> working KMail configuration while I try out combinations of uni-purpose mail
> tools.
This doesn't depend on the MTA (postfix/sendmail/qmail/exim) or the MDA
(procmail/maildrop/MTA itself) but on the mail
Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 07:50, Robert Storey wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:11:14 +1000
>> Furthermore, Intel-based PCs have some well-known exploits
>> (such as buffer overflows) which are a function of the hardware and
>> there is no real cure because changing the C
Andy Saxena wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 07:13:21PM +0200, Juri Haberland wrote:
>>
>> It is said that the server with the most features is Cyrus-IMAPd, which
>> is quite hard to istall and to configure.
>
> I have cyrus server running for personal use, and I am b
Craig Tinson wrote:
>>UW-IMAP (the one you're currently using) stores it's mail in a plain mbox
>>file. It is slow, doesn't scale and eats lot of memory if you have
>>mailboxes > 50 MB (actually it seems to load it completely into memory).
>>So having 10 users each with a mailbox size of 100MB (qu
Craig Tinson wrote:
> ok.. will look into the version that is running (I didn't realise didn't
> imap servers varied so radically) .. and upgrade to courier if I need to...
>
> which comes to another question... is courier (then) the current
> standard (ie *best*) ?
It is said that the server w
Craig Tinson wrote:
> It's the standard imapd server that comes with RH9.. (one of our other
> servers).. I'm not sure which version it is.. maybe courier?
I doubt it, as I can create subfolders in folders on my Courier server.
Most certainly it will be UW-IMAP, which is very limited when it come
Craig Tinson wrote:
> Does imap support folders/sub-folders/sub-sub-folder setups?
>
> I've tried making a folder under the imap connection.. but then it
> doesn't let me create a sub-folder under the newly created folder.. is
> that right?
That depends on the IMAP server. Some do, some don't.
Craig Tinson wrote:
> Hey all..
>
> I use mozilla mail for my email.. and (at the moment) I have about
> 15,000 emails in my "Local Folders".. they are all in
> folders/subfolders/sub-subfolders etc.. and arranged to my liking..
>
> I have another server running imap.. can I just move all my exis
20 matches
Mail list logo
