Re: [vchkpw] Re: 5.4.15 onchange patch

2006-03-31 Thread John Simpson
On 2006-03-30, at 2124, Rick Widmer wrote: John Simpson wrote: http://qmail.jms1.net/vpopmaild.shtml shows a clearer example of how to run vpopmaild under daemontools, by the way. Nice page! Just a thought... if you are only using vpopmaild to verify user logins, you might want to use

RE: [vchkpw] Authentication Problems

2006-03-31 Thread Mike Jimenez
Never mind I am dumb ass and figured it out thanks. From: Mike Jimenez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 12:28 PM To: vchkpw@inter7.com Subject: [vchkpw] Authentication Problems   Hello I am having a difficult time with authentication and I don’t know wha

[vchkpw] Authentication Problems

2006-03-31 Thread Mike Jimenez
Hello I am having a difficult time with authentication and I don’t know what is missing.   What I have done it attempted to setup SMTP authentication.   Since this attempt I have not been able to POP without using the complete email address as the account name.   I have pulled the SMT

Re: [vchkpw] Global addressbook support

2006-03-31 Thread Matt Brookings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 John Simpson wrote: > if by "the hook support" you are referring to the "oncall" patch i sent I probably am, heh. I figured writing up this type of code would be a good idea if there was just some test code floating around that had not been decided

[vchkpw] find_domain bug/patch for vpopmaild

2006-03-31 Thread Rick Widmer
I found a bug in vpopmaild's find_domain function. The function should return just the page number of the page that contains a domain, or page 0 if the given domain does not exist. It was also sending debug information that should be eliminated. A diff is enclosed... --- vpopmail-5.4.1

[vchkpw] Re: Global addressbook support

2006-03-31 Thread Robin Bowes
John Simpson wrote: > > if by "the hook support" you are referring to the "oncall" patch i sent > to the list a few days ago, that would be me- and i think robin bowes > is playing with it, although i think he's focusing more on using an > oncall script rather than editing the oncall code itsel