Hi All,
In my mail server i have two groups and one user is belonging
to both the groups. Previously i was using cyrus at that time when i am
sending a mail to the two groups there will only one mail in the user
mailbox . But now the user is getting one more copy of same mail. Is there
is a
Am 24.02.2010 12:58, schrieb Aravind Divakaran:
Hi All,
In my mail server i have two groups and one user is belonging
to both the groups. Previously i was using cyrus at that time when i am
sending a mail to the two groups there will only one mail in the user
mailbox . But now the user
On 2010-02-24 6:58 AM, Aravind Divakaran wrote:
In my mail server i have two groups and one user is belonging to both
the groups. Previously i was using cyrus at that time when i am
sending a mail to the two groups there will only one mail in the
user mailbox . But now the user is getting one
Hi,
I did some researches and I could reproduce item: 1 - storage inbox in
quick disks and other folders in cheaper ones.
Something like this:
namespace private {
separator = .
prefix =
location = maildir:/tmp/%u/Maildir
inbox = yes
hidden = yes
list = no # for v1.1+
}
namespace
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 13:11:04 +0100, Robert Schetterer
rob...@schetterer.org wrote:
Am 24.02.2010 12:58, schrieb Aravind Divakaran:
Hi All,
In my mail server i have two groups and one user is belonging
to both the groups. Previously i was using cyrus at that time when i am
sending a
Am 24.02.2010 14:02, schrieb Aravind Divakaran:
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 13:11:04 +0100, Robert Schetterer
rob...@schetterer.org wrote:
Am 24.02.2010 12:58, schrieb Aravind Divakaran:
Hi All,
In my mail server i have two groups and one user is belonging
to both the groups. Previously i was
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010, Aravind Divakaran wrote:
Actually as i told there were two groups i have created in my mailserver
which contain a common emailid.
For example
group1: us...@example.com,us...@example.com
group2:
Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 23.2.2010, at 7.04, Mark Sapiro wrote:
Feb 22 20:44:47 sbh16 dovecot: imap(mark): Panic: file
istream-raw-mbox.c: line503 (istream_raw_mbox_get_start_offset):
assertion failed: (rstream-seeked)
I think this fixes it: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.0/rev/d825d532db87
On 24.2.2010, at 16.15, Steffen Kaiser wrote:
group1: us...@example.com,us...@example.com
group2: us...@example.com,us...@example.com
If i am sending a mail to group1 and group2. It is going two times a
single mail to the user1 mailbox. But in dovecot it is not eliminating
since it has the
On Mit, 2010-02-24 at 16:51 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
[...]
(I hate the whole concept of dropping incoming messages as duplicates
based on Message-ID. I would definitely want it disabled for my own
mails, for example that would mean I couldn't filter messages to
mailing lists based on
Hello and thanks for the reply.
Run `./configure --help | less` and read the part:
Fine tuning of the installation directories
That is exactly what I did later defining each and every installation directory
like --libdir=/usr/local/dovecot/lib and so on and so forth.
This Fine tuning is
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:10:11 +0100 Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
On Mit, 2010-02-24 at 16:51 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
[...]
(I hate the whole concept of dropping incoming messages as duplicates
based on Message-ID. I would definitely want it disabled for my own
mails, for example that would
On 2010-02-24 9:51 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
Yeah, I think that's what I answered before too. Dovecot currently
has no duplicate elimination code.
Obviously you would know... so, what is this talking about:
Some uses for home directory are:
* By default Sieve scripts are in user's home
Hello,
i am currenty testing dovecot 2.0.beta3 and ran into a problem with the
master-db setting.
For our webmail access we are sucessfully using the following settings
with dovecot-1.2.10
auth_master_user_separator =*
auth default {
mechanisms = plain
passdb passwd-file {
args =
On 24.2.2010, at 17.24, Hunny Bunny wrote:
That is exactly what I did later defining each and every installation
directory like --libdir=/usr/local/dovecot/lib and so on and so forth.
This Fine tuning is not working as expected. For some reason dovecot adds
that extra 'dovecot' at the
On 24.2.2010, at 18.14, Charles Marcus wrote:
Obviously you would know... so, what is this talking about:
Some uses for home directory are:
* By default Sieve scripts are in user's home directory.
* Duplicate mail check database is in user's home directory.
Duplicate
On 2010-02-24 12:01 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
It's about not sending rejections/vacation replies to same
destination too often. I guess the wiki could be clarified :)
Oh, right... I should have been able to figure that out...
Thanks for being so gentle with the clue-bat... ;)
--
Best
On 19.2.2010, at 18.44, ferna...@dfcom.com.br wrote:
I was following the earlier namespaces discussion and I would like to
repost a doubt. I need to have some kind of archiving, it means, store old
messages into a cheap storage. But I couldn´t think any other solution
than symlinks.
Symlinks
On 2010-02-18 10:50 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
I think they all suck. If I ever have too much time on my hands, I might
try to continue http://trojita.flaska.net/. Its design looks good, but
unfortunately it's nowhere near being actually usable and its
development seems dead.
Hey Timo,
I was
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 01:21 -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Stan Hoeppner put forth on 2/24/2010 12:17 AM:
Timo Sirainen put forth on 2/23/2010 11:06 PM:
No, body searches aren't indexed (without fts plugins).
I wish you'd have mentioned the Squat plugin earlier Timo. I feel I've made
a
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 13:18 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
I was wondering if you might take just a few minutes - no need to go
into great detail or anything unless you can do so off the top of your
head and don't mind - and outline what you see as the biggest problems
with all of these sucky
On 24/02/2010 18:37, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 13:18 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
I was wondering if you might take just a few minutes - no need to go
into great detail or anything unless you can do so off the top of your
head and don't mind - and outline what you see as
Seriously, I just have to ask this question. Why mark via the subject
line a message as OFF LIST and then send it via the normal list
framework. Doing so only insures that the message is actually ON
LIST irregardless of what nomenclature is used in the subject line. If
a message is truly supposed
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:06 PM, Jerry wrote:
Seriously, I just have to ask this question. Why mark via the subject
line a message as OFF LIST and then send it via the normal list
framework. Doing so only insures that the message is actually ON
LIST irregardless of what nomenclature is used in the
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Timo Sirainen t...@iki.fi wrote:
Basically:
1) Online mode: Don't download all message headers at once at startup.
If I open a mailbox, I'm seeing only about 20 messages on screen. That's
all it needs to download. When I scroll the message list, download more
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:37:52PM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 13:18 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
I was wondering if you might take just a few minutes - no need to go
into great detail or anything unless you can do so off the top of your
head and don't mind - and
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 14:10:40 -0500
Dave McGuire mcgu...@neurotica.com articulated:
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:06 PM, Jerry wrote:
Seriously, I just have to ask this question. Why mark via the
subject line a message as OFF LIST and then send it via the
normal list framework. Doing so only
Quoting Jim Trigg jtr...@spamcop.net:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:37:52PM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
2) Just implement IMAP protocol correctly and efficiently and without
pointless settings, such as TB's server supports folders that have
subfolders. The HOWTO is mainly about this.
Like
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:39 PM, Jerry wrote:
Seriously, I just have to ask this question. Why mark via the
subject line a message as OFF LIST and then send it via the
normal list framework. Doing so only insures that the message is
actually ON LIST irregardless of what nomenclature is used in the
Speaking of off-list, would you two kindly take this interchange...
off list?
On Feb 24, 2010, at 1:51 PM, Michael M. Slusarz wrote:
Quoting Jim Trigg jtr...@spamcop.net:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:37:52PM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
2) Just implement IMAP protocol correctly and efficiently and
without
pointless settings, such as TB's server supports folders that
Example:
* I have 100's of sent-mail mailboxes I don't want to be subscribed
to, because it is doubtful I will ever use them. These mailboxes are
unsubscribed because I don't want to see them in any mailbox listings
by default.
This use of subscriptions is a terrible abuse of IMAP. Like
On 24.2.2010, at 22.08, WJCarpenter wrote:
This use of subscriptions is a terrible abuse of IMAP. Like most terrible
abuses, it's a-ok to choose for yourself if you're an advanced user, but
anyone who has done support for a broad user base knows that a client should
*NEVER* act like this
Hi,
Just wondering for all you people using Dovecot out there.
1. What mailbox protocol are you using?
2. What version of Dovecot?
Thanks!
*
* Tom Goerger - Email/Unix System Administrator *
*
Hello,
Can Dovecot allow some users access to IMAP functionality while forcing other
users to use POP3 only?
--
Larry Crouch
Alpha-USA
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:08 PM, WJCarpenter wrote:
Example:
* I have 100's of sent-mail mailboxes I don't want to be
subscribed to, because it is doubtful I will ever use them. These
mailboxes are unsubscribed because I don't want to see them in any
mailbox listings by default.
This use
On 2/24/2010 12:26 PM, Thomas M Goerger wrote:
Just wondering for all you people using Dovecot out there.
1. What mailbox protocol are you using?
2. What version of Dovecot?
We're using mbox on 1.2.9.
--
Dave Brenner - da...@toledotel.com
The Toledo Telephone Company, Inc.
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:13 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 24.2.2010, at 22.08, WJCarpenter wrote:
This use of subscriptions is a terrible abuse of IMAP. Like most
terrible abuses, it's a-ok to choose for yourself if you're an
advanced user, but anyone who has done support for a broad user
On 24.2.2010, at 22.27, Larry Crouch wrote:
Can Dovecot allow some users access to IMAP functionality while forcing other
users to use POP3 only?
http://wiki.dovecot.org/Authentication/RestrictAccess
Subscriptions themselves aren't an abuse of IMAP, obviously, as they
are in the spec. A client that *by default* uses them to hide folders
is abusing them, for exactly the reasons I explained. They are
non-portable because:
I agree 100% that hiding folders by default is bad, but I've never
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:48 PM, WJCarpenter wrote:
Subscriptions themselves aren't an abuse of IMAP, obviously, as
they are in the spec. A client that *by default* uses them to hide
folders is abusing them, for exactly the reasons I explained. They
are non-portable because:
I agree 100%
Dan Swartzendruber wrote:
I am using the antispam plugin and am very happy with it. I also have
a default sieve rule that I found online somewhere that says if you
see a message that is flagged as spam and not reclassified as
innocent, to mark it as seen and move it to the INBOX.SPAM
Dan Swartzendruber wrote:
Dan Swartzendruber wrote:
I am using the antispam plugin and am very happy with it. I also have
a default sieve rule that I found online somewhere that says if you
see a message that is flagged as spam and not reclassified as
innocent, to mark it as seen and move
Okay, thanks. I'll live with it the way it is.
On 2/24/10 4:51 PM +0200 Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 24.2.2010, at 16.15, Steffen Kaiser wrote:
group1: us...@example.com,us...@example.com
group2: us...@example.com,us...@example.com
If i am sending a mail to group1 and group2. It is going two times a
single mail to the user1 mailbox. But in
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 14:26:07 -0600 (CST) Thomas M Goerger wrote:
Hi,
Just wondering for all you people using Dovecot out there.
1. What mailbox protocol are you using?
maildir++
2. What version of Dovecot?
dovecot-1.2.10, imaps only.
--Frank Elsner
Quoting Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com:
I guess you didn't have enough (any?) people testing mbox body search before
the v1.2 release. Is everyone but me using maildir? Makes me wish I had an
extra box so I could do dovecot devel version testing against mbox.
I'm running mbox with 1.2
Thomas M Goerger put forth on 2/24/2010 2:26 PM:
Hi,
Just wondering for all you people using Dovecot out there.
1. What mailbox protocol are you using?
2. What version of Dovecot?
Hi Thomas,
1. IMAP, mbox
2. Dovecot 1.2.10 on Debian Lenny
--
Stan
Quoting Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com:
I'm running mbox with 1.2 and not seeing any problems... But that may be
because I threw a lot of hardware at it?
Hi Eric. Not sure if even fast hardware searching 11,000+ message count
mbox'en without an FTS plugin would give speedy results,
Eric Rostetter put forth on 2/24/2010 11:04 PM:
But it works okay on my 4K to 5K message mbox files, which are the largest
I have... Usually takes about 1 second per 1K messages, so about 4 seconds
for the 4K mbox, 5 seconds for the 5K mbox, etc. Of course, a bit slower
when the server is
On 02/24/2010 07:27 PM Timo Sirainen wrote:
Well, when index is up-to-date it's fast. But after you've received a
few mails, at least with me it seemed to spend more time updating the
index than just doing the regular search.
I've never setup any of the three FTS plugins. I've only seen, that
On 25.2.2010, at 7.47, Pascal Volk wrote:
On 02/24/2010 07:27 PM Timo Sirainen wrote:
Well, when index is up-to-date it's fast. But after you've received a
few mails, at least with me it seemed to spend more time updating the
index than just doing the regular search.
I've never setup any
On 02/25/2010 06:55 AM Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 25.2.2010, at 7.47, Pascal Volk wrote:
When the index should be up-to-date all the time (what's very important
(IMHO)), I'm asking myself: Why are there no fts plugins for the lda and
lmtp section? When the index would by updated on delivery, it
Le Wed, 24 Feb 2010 14:26:07 -0600 (CST),
Thomas M Goerger t...@umn.edu a écrit :
Hi,
Just wondering for all you people using Dovecot out there.
1. What mailbox protocol are you using?
2. What version of Dovecot?
Thanks!
Dovecot 1.1.4 on Ubuntu 8.10 64bits with IMAPS only and mbox
54 matches
Mail list logo
