Hi,
After using dovecot for several years now, today happend something which
makes me really feel unconfortable: An email received was just not
delivered properly, or, is lost! The mail (from an external server) was
sent to two local mailboxes, user1 and user2. user1 received the message
but for u
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 12 Nov 2012, Lukas Haase wrote:
Nov 12 07:28:21 mail dovecot: deliver(user2): sieve:
msgid=<8644593.887351352701685934.JavaMail.orbitz>: stored mail into
mailbox 'INBOX'
are there any other log lines of user2?
- --
Steffen Kaiser
-B
Hello!
I have dovecot running. Imap works fine. When i connect with outlook an when i
delete a message it gets crossed out but still stays in my mailbox. I want to
disable this feature. I want it once its deleted then go to trash folder on the
mail server and thats it. Is there an option for thi
Hi,
On 11/12/2012 1:19 AM, Steffen Kaiser wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012, Lukas Haase wrote:
>
>> Nov 12 07:28:21 mail dovecot: deliver(user2): sieve:
>> msgid=<8644593.887351352701685934.JavaMail.orbitz>: stored mail into
>> mailbox 'INBOX'
>
> are there any other log lines of user2?
Anfortunate
On 11/12/2012 4:40 AM, Tibby wrote:
Hello!
I have dovecot running. Imap works fine. When i connect with outlook an when i
delete a message it gets crossed out but still stays in my mailbox. I want to
disable this feature. I want it once its deleted then go to trash folder on the
mail server a
Hi,
the Managesieve server closes the connection if it receives an unknown
command before authentication:
"IMPLEMENTATION" "Dovecot Pigeonhole"
"SIEVE" "fileinto reject envelope encoded-character vacation subaddress
comparator-i;ascii-numeric relational regex imap4flags copy include
variable
On 11/12/2012 10:49 AM, Christoph Bußenius wrote:
Hi,
the Managesieve server closes the connection if it receives an unknown
command before authentication:
Note that only one bogus command has been sent by the client, however
the server sends two identical error messages.
This seems to be
Hi Stephan,
On 12.11.2012 11:18, Stephan Bosch wrote:
I fixed this a while back, but hasn't been released so far:
http://hg.rename-it.nl/dovecot-2.1-pigeonhole/rev/ceef02768dee
thanks, I am going to try out the current hg version. I guess I should
have tried this first...
Cheers,
Christop
On 08/11/2012 23:53, Ben Morrow wrote:
At 3AM -0600 on 8/11/12 you (Stan Hoeppner) wrote:
1.0.7 is absolutely ancient and no longer officially supported. You
need 1.2.x minimum, 2.x.x even better. And you say you just recently
upgraded your Linux distro? What planet do you live on son? Yo
Hi all,
Dovecot Oy’s web pages at www.dovecot.fi have been updated. The products page
lists two features that will be available for commercial licensing, extending
the functionality of the basic open-source version of Dovecot.
* Storing emails to (high-latency) object storage, initially support
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 20:13:54 -0800
Daniel L. Miller articulated:
> I don't know what the problem is - I just know that I've
> heard from a number of developers (including the Postfix & Dovecot
> developers) that they don't like OpenSSL - but while GnuTLS looks
> interesting they aren't interested
Il 12/11/2012 12:33, Timo Sirainen ha scritto:
Hi all,
Dovecot Oy’s web pages at www.dovecot.fi have been updated. The products page
lists two features that will be available for commercial licensing, extending
the functionality of the basic open-source version of Dovecot.
* Storing emails to
On 12/11/2012 04:13, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
The tiny bit of Googling I've done tells me GnuTLS
seems to be a more standards-compliant implementation, and MAY be
"safer" than OpenSSL. However, as OpenSSL is the de-facto standard used
by most Linux programs, acceptance of GnuTLS is quite limited.
On 12.11.2012, at 6.13, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
>> where is the problem with openssl?
>
> I don't know what the problem is - I just know that I've
> heard from a number of developers (including the Postfix & Dovecot
> developers) that they don't like OpenSSL - but while GnuTLS looks
> interesting
On 11/11/2012 5:26 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Have you made systematic tests? I.e. compared times for all of these
> with those from the different dovecot backends.
The choice of Dovecot backends made no substantial difference. I used maildir,
sdbox, and mdbox. I also added SiS (with
On 13.11.2012, at 0.44, Robin wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 5:26 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
>> Have you made systematic tests? I.e. compared times for all of these
>> with those from the different dovecot backends.
>
> The choice of Dovecot backends made no substantial difference. I used
> ma
Uh..
On 13.11.2012, at 1.02, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 13.11.2012, at 0.44, Robin wrote:
>
>> On 11/11/2012 5:26 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
>>> Have you made systematic tests? I.e. compared times for all of these
>>> with those from the different dovecot backends.
>>
>> The choice of D
Il 13/11/2012 06:09, Ajai Khattri ha scritto:
Ive been using qmail+vpopmail+courier-imap for many years but its time to
retire that server so I thought this might be an opportunity to see how I
could use Postfix and Dovecot to provide the same services. Im running
Dovecot 2.1.9 and Postfix 2.9.4.
18 matches
Mail list logo
