Hi,
evolution has a bug when it comes to closing and IDLE' connection:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=628515
evolution does not send a DONE command, and dovecot properly answers
with an error. evolution ignores this and seems to wait on another
response.
Timo, do you think there cou
Hi,
On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 17:34 +, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 18:57 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
>
> > dsync(athimm): Info: old/speicher: highest_modseq changed: 1 != 10
> > dsync(athimm): Info: root/root-heretic: highest_modseq changed: 1 != 10
> > ds
Hi again,
after replacing CRLF in 4 mboxes dsync was able to sync all of the 30+GB
mailstore to mdbox.
Now the (repeated) calling of dsync yields info messages of the kind
dsync(athimm): Info: old/speicher: highest_modseq changed: 1 != 10
dsync(athimm): Info: root/root-heretic: highest_modseq ch
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 18:32 +, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 15.11.2010, at 18.15, Axel Thimm wrote:
>
> >> dsync2.log.old1:dsync(user): Error: Next message unexpectedly lost from
> >> mbox file /home/user/mail/lists/mplayerhq.hu/ffmpeg-devel at 58706201
> >> (c
Hi,
I'm trying to convert a 33GB mail store from mbox to compressed mdbox
(largest mbox is 2.7GB). The source store is live, e.g. there are mails
delivered into it and mails are being read. Actually it is my own
mail. :)
Although my test runs were very successful I have run into trouble with
the
Hi,
On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 09:28 +0200, wolfgang.frie...@desy.de wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2010, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > Still managesieve-login manages to be built w/o rpath. But this is in
> > another specfile altogether, which doesn't even use --disable-rpath. So
> > t
On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 10:24 +0200, Juan C. Blanco wrote:
> On 27/10/2010 20:16, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 19:05 +0200, Juan C. Blanco wrote:
> >> I've dounloaded the archive for pigeonhole, once decompressed:
> >>
> >> If I do:
> &g
On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 21:49 +0200, wolfgang.frie...@desy.de wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 17:47 +0200, wolfgang.frie...@desy.de wrote:
> >> Therefore the executable will fail to run:
> >>
> >> ldd /usr/libexec/dovecot/managesieve-login
> >> libdovecot-login.so.0 => not found
> >>
Hi Juan,
sorry for the late reply I just picked this up mentioning ATrpms:
On Mon, 2010-10-04 at 19:05 +0200, Juan C. Blanco wrote:
> Hello Stephan I have some problems to build pigeonhole 0.2.1 over dovect
> 2.0.5, I've had no problems with previous versions; the system is CentOS
> 5.5.
FWIW
On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 12:24 -0700, Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
> Alan Brown wrote:
> > ATrpms has builds too, but they're usually out of date.
>
> Yeah way of of date. 1.0.7 I think is what I saw.
Hm, ATrpms is usually shipping packages within a few days after a
release as well as packages of be
Hi,
pigeonhole/sieve check against dovecot's version comparing to what they
have been built against.
This means that whenever there is a minor version of dovecot released
pigeonhole/sieve need to be rebuilt and then redistributed to users even
if there is no need for it (I'm thinking of packaged
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 11:53:32AM +0100, Nabil TAZI wrote:
> can you help me to disable the "/Noselect" flag from folder so imap
> client can select the folder and his sub-folders to store mails inside
If this is an mbox backend then I think you are not supposed to, as
"selectable" im imap
On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 04:01:24PM +0100, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 13:56 +0300, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > Jul 28 19:42:48 lda(athimm): Panic: file mailbox-list-fs.c: line 150
> > > (fs_list_get_path): assertion failed:
> > > (mailbox_list_is_valid_pa
On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 22:08 +0300, Axel Thimm wrote:
> I know this has been fixed on July 11th, and I'm not using acl or mdbox
> (yet), but I see similar errors on 2.0rc3 on plain mboxes:
>
> Jul 28 19:42:48 lda(athimm): Panic: file mailbox-list-fs.c: line 150
> (fs_list_
Hi,
On Sun, 2010-07-11 at 09:46 +0200, Matthias Rieber wrote:
> I've converted some accounts with "dsync mirror maildir:~/Maildir". It
> seemed to work, but when I access the folders via IMAP I get the
> following error:
>
> Jul 11 09:41:59 shrike dovecot: imap(matze): Debug: acl vfile: file
>
On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 11:29 +0200, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> * Axel Thimm :
> > I'm currently restructuring my mail archives and migrated from a decade
> > and a half old procmail supported solution to sieve.
> >
> > While doing so I often found that I'
Hi,
I'm currently restructuring my mail archives and migrated from a decade
and a half old procmail supported solution to sieve.
While doing so I often found that I'd like to filter a bunch of messages
(with "bunch" in the area of 1-10K) with my shiny new sieve script. I
found in the wiki a way t
Hi,
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 08:02:03PM -0700, Brandon Davidson wrote:
> On 5/30/10 2:49 PM, "Axel Thimm" wrote:
> > How are your %optflags (which is the same as $RPM_OPT_FLAGS) merged
> > into the build [...]
>
> They're exported by the %configure macro,
Hi,
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 12:22:52PM -0700, Brandon Davidson wrote:
> On 5/30/10 10:22 AM, "Axel Thimm" wrote:
> >>
> >> Oh, the spec file overrides CFLAGS and doesn't contain -std=gnu99?
> >>
> > The config.log for RHEL5/x86_64 says:
Hi,
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 12:12:17PM +0100, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 30.5.2010, at 12.03, Brandon Davidson wrote:
>
> > If I '%define optflags -std=gnu99' in the spec it builds just fine, so I
> > don't think it's a compiler problem. Maybe a libtool issue?
>
> Oh, the spec file overrides CFLA
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 12:30:48PM +0300, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 10:41:12AM +0200, Pascal Volk wrote:
> > On 05/30/2010 09:54 AM Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > LLONG_MIN/LLONG_MAX and some other defines are there, but protected by
> > >
> > > # i
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 02:32:49AM -0700, Brandon Davidson wrote:
>
> Axel,
>
> On 5/30/10 12:05 AM, "Axel Thimm" wrote:
> > beta4 built under RHEL4, RHEL5 and RHEL6 (the latter being the public
> > beta). beta5 now builds only for RHEL5, the other two fail wi
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 10:41:12AM +0200, Pascal Volk wrote:
> On 05/30/2010 09:54 AM Axel Thimm wrote:
> > LLONG_MIN/LLONG_MAX and some other defines are there, but protected by
> >
> > # ifdef __USE_ISOC99
> >
> > Maybe dovecot's buildsystem should chec
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 09:42:38AM +0200, Pascal Volk wrote:
> On 05/30/2010 09:05 AM Axel Thimm wrote:
> > beta4 built under RHEL4, RHEL5 and RHEL6 (the latter being the
> > public beta). beta5 now builds only for RHEL5, the other two fail
> > with:
> >
> > st
Hi,
beta4 built under RHEL4, RHEL5 and RHEL6 (the latter being the public
beta). beta5 now builds only for RHEL5, the other two fail with:
strnum.c: In function `str_to_llong':
strnum.c:139: error: `LLONG_MIN' undeclared (first use in this function)
strnum.c:139: error: (Each undeclared identifie
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 12:09:27PM +0200, Stephan Bosch wrote:
> Axel Thimm wrote:
> >As a (downstream) packager I have some questions:
> >
> >a) pigeonhole is called a working title - will the final release
> > be called something else like dovecot-sieve again?
>
Hi Stephan,
many thanks for all the work you do on the new sieve parts to dovecot.
As a (downstream) packager I have some questions:
a) pigeonhole is called a working title - will the final release
be called something else like dovecot-sieve again?
b) The versioning seems to go from 0.1.15 to
Hi,
I'm a long term dovecot user, packager and believer, but on the other
side of the wire I've been a mutt user for longer than I can think.
Which modern email client under Linux is working best with dovecot? I
just did a grep on User-Agent:/X-Mailer: on my dovecot archive (which
goes back to 20
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 09:22:12AM -0400, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Oct 6, 2009, at 9:00 AM, Bruce Bodger wrote:
>
>>
>> On Oct 6, 2009, at 3:55 AM, Jernej Porenta wrote:
>>
>>> I am expiriencing compiling issues on Solaris 8 and Solaris 10 boxes
>>> with dovecot 1.2.6. On Solaris 8 the compiler i
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 12:33:21PM +0200, Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Axel Thimm schrieb:
> > Given than you seem to bless Apple Mail folder structures it makes it
> > a good candidate to try to push as a standard for others to
> > copy. Maybe there could be example setups
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 11:40:21AM +0300, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 07:55:41PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > On Sep 25, 2009, at 7:49 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
> >
> >> Timo Sirainen wrote:
> >>> On Sep 25, 2009, at 4:14 PM, Patrick Ben Koet
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 07:55:41PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Sep 25, 2009, at 7:49 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
>
>> Timo Sirainen wrote:
>>> On Sep 25, 2009, at 4:14 PM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
Has anyone seen an approach or a solution that solves the problem
from a users
poi
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 08:00:42PM -0400, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 19:53 -0400, Rob Mangiafico wrote:
> > > What permissions does /var/spool/mail/john have? I guess mail group has
> > > read permissions? Just removing that should fix the error.
> >
> > -rw-rw 1 john m
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 01:25:43PM -0800, Mark Hedges wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > Ah, this explains everything. Fixed both your problem and
> > the segfault: f831d12187d1
>
> Yes, this patch fixed the problem when applied to pristine
> 1.1.11 source.
>
> Will there be a
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 09:52:58PM +0800, Frank Wang wrote:
> > You don't need to rebuild ATrpms' packages for symbol support, just
> > install the debuginfo package as well.
> I've done that and posted the gdb backtrack already.
> Is there any other info needed?
Some symbol tables were missing. I
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 08:07:48PM +0800, Frank Wang wrote:
> > * Frank Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > > Another possibility would be to attach gdb to the running dovecot-auth
> > > > process:
> >
> > And to build a binary with symbols (-g option, no stripping)
> I used rpmbuild -ba to bui
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 10:55:08AM -0500, Eric Rostetter wrote:
> Quoting Charles Marcus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> rpms for centos available on atrpms.net
> Sadly not for Centos 3.x, only for Centos 4/5... :(
> Anyone know about Dovecot 1.1.x rpms for Centos/RHEL 3.x?
You could try to rebuild f
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 01:01:22PM +0300, Uldis Pakuls wrote:
> Thomas Harold wrote:
>> Uldis Pakuls wrote:
# yum list | grep "dovecot"
dovecot.x86_64 1:1.1.1-2_76.el5 installed
dovecot-sieve.x86_64 1.1.5-8.el5 installed
dovecot.x86_
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 01:55:53PM +0200, Angel Marin wrote:
> Axel Thimm wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 06:30:22AM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
>>> On 4/30/2008 4:23 AM, Axel Thimm wrote:
>>>> There are no 1.1 rpms yet at ATrpms.
>>> Oops, my bad...
&g
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 06:30:22AM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 4/30/2008 4:23 AM, Axel Thimm wrote:
>> There are no 1.1 rpms yet at ATrpms.
>
> Oops, my bad...
>
>> If there is interest, we can put some up, but I'd rather wait until
>> Timo starts rel
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 10:01:30AM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 4/25/2008 6:15 PM, Patrick wrote:
>> I'm trying to find an rpm for the 1.1 version, since it appears to work
>> better with NFS. Does anyone have a link to the i386 version?
>
> atrpms.net has them, but the ones for Centos4
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 12:03:53AM +0800, Frank Wang wrote:
> > On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 21:46 +0800, Frank Wang wrote:
> > You can find newer Dovecot RPMs for CentOS 5 from atrpms.net.
> >
> Thanks for the quick reply.
> I've tested the dovecot-1.0.10-0_66.el5 from atrpms.net. The reconnection
> pr
On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 07:12:20PM +, Anne Wilson wrote:
> On Thursday 24 January 2008 19:00:23 Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 18:47 +, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > > On Thursday 24 January 2008 18:23:49 Asheesh Laroia wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > > >
On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 05:19:08PM -0500, Joe Allesi -X (joallesi - Coyote
Creek Consulting at Cisco) wrote:
> We're stuck on RHEL 4.x, so we're currently working on a plan to live in
> harmony with .99 for another year or so.
There are packages for dovecot 1.0.7 for RHEL4 at ATrpms, try them, it
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 03:21:08PM -0500, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Axel Thimm wrote:
>
> >On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 05:15:24PM -0800, jan gestre wrote:
> >>I'm using CentOS 4.5, is the dovecot default rpm comes with mysql
> >>support?
On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 05:15:24PM -0800, jan gestre wrote:
> I'm using CentOS 4.5, is the dovecot default rpm comes with mysql
> support? Do I need to rebuild it?
The packages at ATrpms already come with mysql support. Did you try them?
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
pgpLziCD8DpAc.pgp
Description
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 04:26:34PM -0700, Scott Silva wrote:
> Big Pizzle spake the following on 8/2/2007 4:19 PM:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm almost finished building our new load balanced email server that are
> > attached to an NFS mountpoint. There are currently two e-mail servers
> > connected t
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 05:52:55PM -0700, Big Pizzle wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't know how to compile Dovecot from src rpm;s - in fact I tried and
> failed miserably. The only other src rpm I have ever built was postfix, and
> I ran into a whole bunch of errors trying to build an rpm from the src rpm
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 05:14:39PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> I thought about committing this change to all .c files:
>
> Removed all Copyright Timo Sirainen comments. They weren't always
> correct and the year numbers were rarely updated when something was
> changed. Copyright is owned by the
On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 07:55:32PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> http://dovecot.org/releases/dovecot-1.0.1.tar.gz
> http://dovecot.org/releases/dovecot-1.0.1.tar.gz.sig
>
> Lots of small fixes.
Packages for RHEL3,4,5 and FC5,6 and F7 are updated to 1.0.1:
http://atrpms.net/name/dovecot/
>
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 04:18:06PM -0700, Scott Silva wrote:
> Mark Nienberg spake the following on 6/13/2007 4:04 PM:
> > Axel Thimm wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Are people interested in seeing 1.0.1rcX packaged?
> >
> > Not the RC, but I'm on the edge
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 10:01:13PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> http://dovecot.org/tmp/dovecot-1.0.1rc3.tar.gz
>
> Looks like I managed to do a lot of changes today. So I'll wait a few
> more days before v1.0.1 release. The important changes since rc2:
>
> + deliver: Added -e parameter to
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 02:23:17PM -0500, J.Palacios wrote:
> Yes, but they are all RC.. i need to update v.0.99 to v1.0.0
Did you really look close enough? The very first package lists is
1.0.0 gold.
> Thanks,
>
> JC
>
> -Mensaje original-
> De: Axel Thimm [ma
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:43:54PM -0500, J.Palacios wrote:
> Hi List,
>
> Plis, where can i find an updated version (for recently dovecot v1.0.0) of
> dovecot.spec, needed to build an rpm for RH 4?
Have you checked the wiki?
There are specfiles, src.rpm and binary packages for RHEL4 at
http://a
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 03:04:23PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> It took almost 5 years, but it's finally ready. I'm not expecting to
> release v1.0.1 anytime soon, unless someone's been sitting on a major
> bug just waiting for v1.0 to be released. :)
Happy zeroth birthday :)
--
Axel.Thimm at AT
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 10:47:30PM +0100, John Robinson wrote:
> On 29/03/2007 22:27, Axel Thimm wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 09:43:48PM +0100, John Robinson wrote:
> >>[...] If you use ATrpms packages, you
> >>ought to have read the support details (i.e. testing
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 09:43:48PM +0100, John Robinson wrote:
> People like me? Again, if you use a RHEL clone like CentOS, you ought to
> have read the support details (i.e. this is a free rebuild, you may rely
> on RH but don't complain to them or us). If you use ATrpms packages, you
> ought
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 01:39:55PM -0500, Eric Rostetter wrote:
> I go to atrpms or dag wieers or elsewhere, and it might list both devel
> and production ones, but it doesn't say that, it just lists version
> numbers. How am I to know, unless I'm smart enough to go to the original
> web site and
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 03:46:40AM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> After v1.0 is released, I can finally get back to sane version numbers.
> But any comments on which one is better:
>
> a) Postfix-style: "1.1.UNSTABLE.MMDD" -> 1.1.0 (stable)
>
> b) Odd-even numbering: 1.1.x (unstable) -> 1.2.0
On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 11:03:01AM +0200, Egbert Jan wrote:
> Maybe best asked to Axel...
>
> I'm re-building my server from scratch (the old one was MDK 10.1 -> Mandriva
> 2006.0 with Postfix/Courier) and I want to install the latest versions
> postfix/mysql/postfixadmin/dovecot/squirrelmail.
>
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 12:23:04PM -0400, Oliver Schulze L. wrote:
> I'm building dovecot.src.rpm with vpopmail support and I get this error:
> - dovecot rpm from:
> http://dl.atrpms.net/all/dovecot-1.0-3_50.rc27.at.src.rpm
> - rpmbuild command:
> rpmbuild --rebuild --without inotify --with
On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 06:17:24PM -0700, Alex Boster wrote:
> Thanks -- we figured it out, but that is good to see.
>
> Yes, it was 0.99 but has been upgraded. We are filtering out the
> problematic headers and removed them from the "broken" mbox files.
> Everything is working fine now.
>
62 matches
Mail list logo
