On 10/10/27 09:56, Jerry wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:11:02 -1000
> Camron W. Fox articulated:
>
>> On 10/10/19 08:01, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>>> No. The username is sent another way to deliver. Anyway, I think -d
>>> $RECIPIENT is the right way.
>>>
>> Timo,
>>
>> I modified the mailbox co
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 09:11:02 -1000
Camron W. Fox articulated:
> On 10/10/19 08:01, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > No. The username is sent another way to deliver. Anyway, I think -d
> > $RECIPIENT is the right way.
> >
> Timo,
>
> I modified the mailbox command in /etc/postfix/main.cf:
>
> mai
On 27.10.2010, at 21.11, Camron W. Fox wrote:
> mailbox_command = /usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${recipient}
>
> This causes postfix to bounce the message with this error:
>
> Oct 27 09:06:57 rb8 postfix/local[1931]: A99494E0D25:
> to=, relay=local, delay=10,
> delays=0.08/0/0/10, dsn=5.
On 10/10/19 08:01, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> No. The username is sent another way to deliver. Anyway, I think -d
> $RECIPIENT is the right way.
>
Timo,
I modified the mailbox command in /etc/postfix/main.cf:
mailbox_command = /usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -d ${recipient}
This causes
On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 13:09 -1000, Camron W. Fox wrote:
>
> Looking at the logs, it appears that it must already be using -d $user
> because of the username shown in the deliver lines in dovecot.log, right?
No. The username is sent another way to deliver. Anyway, I think -d
$RECIPIENT is
On 10/10/18 11:28, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 18.10.2010, at 20.42, Camron W. Fox wrote:
>
>>> You're not calling deliver with -d parameter?
>>
>> No. Did I miss that in the documentation? Where is that configured?
>> This is what I have in postfix main.cf:
>>
>> mailbox_command = /usr/libexec
On 18.10.2010, at 20.42, Camron W. Fox wrote:
>> You're not calling deliver with -d parameter?
>
> No. Did I miss that in the documentation? Where is that configured?
> This is what I have in postfix main.cf:
>
> mailbox_command = /usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver
Often that's done with system
On 10/10/18 04:15, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 09:29 -1000, Camron W. Fox wrote:
>
>> Once again, dovecot-imap seems to read the info correctly, as
>> the TBird
>> plugin reads 20MB as the user quota, but deliver begins to reject mail
>> at the 10MB default. Also, the quot
On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 09:29 -1000, Camron W. Fox wrote:
> Once again, dovecot-imap seems to read the info correctly, as
> the TBird
> plugin reads 20MB as the user quota, but deliver begins to reject mail
> at the 10MB default. Also, the quota warning messages are sent base on
> the defaul
On 10/10/08 13:47, Aliet Santiesteban Sifontes wrote:
> Camron, if you look in the downloads link at dovecot site, you can can
> check:
>
> http://wiki2.dovecot.org/PrebuiltBinaries#RPMs_of_newer_Dovecot_and_Sieve_packages
>
> There you will find references to third party repositories wich build
On 7.10.2010, at 22.12, Camron W. Fox wrote:
> Dovecot-imap appear to recognize the quota from ldap, as the
> Thunderbird quota plugin reads the correct info from LDAP if the
> mailQuotaSize entry exists, and the default storage=10240 from
> doveconf.conf if there is no LDAP attr.
ok, so
>
Camron, if you look in the downloads link at dovecot site, you can can
check:
http://wiki2.dovecot.org/PrebuiltBinaries#RPMs_of_newer_Dovecot_and_Sieve_packages
There you will find references to third party repositories wich build latest
dovecot rpm versions for rhel5.5. If you will use atrpms fo
On 10/10/08 08:59, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-10-08 2:10 PM, Camron W. Fox wrote:
>> I started poking @ 1.2 as you suggested, but I run into libcurl-devel
>> dependency issues. Does anyone know where to get a libcurl-devel RPM for
>> RHEL5?
>
> I'd think you could get everything you needed fr
On 2010-10-08 2:10 PM, Camron W. Fox wrote:
> I started poking @ 1.2 as you suggested, but I run into libcurl-devel
> dependency issues. Does anyone know where to get a libcurl-devel RPM for
> RHEL5?
I'd think you could get everything you needed from the extra
repositories (I think RHEL uses the C
On 10/10/07 10:08, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-10-07 3:38 PM, Camron W. Fox wrote:
>> If we upgrade, then we lose RH support for any future dovecot issues
>> (not that they're being particularly helpful with this issue).
>
> Personally I think you'd get much higher quality support for free rig
On 10/10/07 10:08, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-10-07 3:38 PM, Camron W. Fox wrote:
>> If we upgrade, then we lose RH support for any future dovecot issues
>> (not that they're being particularly helpful with this issue).
>
> Personally I think you'd get much higher quality support for free rig
On 2010-10-07 3:38 PM, Camron W. Fox wrote:
> If we upgrade, then we lose RH support for any future dovecot issues
> (not that they're being particularly helpful with this issue).
Personally I think you'd get much higher quality support for free right
here from the developer himself...
But of cou
On 07/10/2010 20:38, Camron W. Fox wrote:
If we upgrade, then we lose RH support for any future dovecot issues
And if you don't upgrade, you don't get any support from the guy who
wrote Dovecot and therefore knows it inside-out :-)
I tend to suggest the practice of: Keep your server "on dist
On 10/10/07 09:17, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-10-07 3:12 PM, Camron W. Fox wrote:
>> We're running Dovecot V1.0.7 on RHEL5.5,
>
> Very old, you will not get much support unless/until you upgrade...
> 1.2.15 is recommended for most, although 2.0.5 is current stable...
>
> Lots of changes with
On 2010-10-07 3:12 PM, Camron W. Fox wrote:
> We're running Dovecot V1.0.7 on RHEL5.5,
Very old, you will not get much support unless/until you upgrade...
1.2.15 is recommended for most, although 2.0.5 is current stable...
Lots of changes with respect to quotas (and everything else)...
--
Best
20 matches
Mail list logo
