[Dovecot] dovecot/deliver ... Can't open log file /var/log/dovecot/error.log: Permission denied

[Phil Howard]

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 19:25, Noel Butler <noel.butler at ausics.net> wrote:

>  > And it did seem to do that already.  Mail was sent to dovecot/deliver.
>  It
> > included the domain name.  But deliver just didn't construct the
> > mail_location correctly due to %d being empty.  The resulting path with
> the
> > empty space where the domain name should have been was used to actually
> > deliver the mail.  I read that file and the domain name was also in the
> > headers.  The domain was there, but %d didn't get it.
> >
> >
>
> interesting...
>
> %d is derived from the right hand side of a username, dovecot's deliver
> couldn't care less about verifying the domain, since that is the MTA's
> job.
>

No doubt.  However, the big question is WHICH particular instance of
user at domain does it derive domain from?  There is more than one inside the
headers.  There are also options -a and -d and maybe it gets it from ONE of
those.  Or maybe it looks around more than once source for an address to
derive the RHS from.  I doubt it would verify any more so than whether it
should deliver.  But it did deliver, so clearly it believed it could.  That
big question can also be in the form of "where should the domain be provided
that it so far was not provided in?".


> I tried it, but effectively, nothing happened.  Maybe the other virtual_*
> > stuff also needs to be configured.  I've used that virtual_* stuff before
>
>
>
> it certainly does
>

That's a different mode of operation of Postfix that I have had troubles
with in the past.  The big one I remember having (of more than one) was that
it treated all the domains as equivalent.  That is, bob at example.com and
bob at example.net were the same.  OTOH, that may have been due to mishandling
of, or by, the NON-Dovecot delivery agent I was using back then.

So I'll try this with Dovecot deliver.  Been out of the office for a couple
days, so I hope I'll have some time today to give it a shot.



>  > I'm using "passwd-file" to authenticate, and mail_location = to compose
> a
> > pattern of where each maildir will be found.  I won't be using a backend
> > database (that's the last thing I want to do).
> >
>
>
> why not? it simplifies virtual users, you're trying to use a method
> primarily designed for system accounts, as demonstrated over the past
> several days you are only giving yourself pain for no reason.
>

I don't see how one database lookup method vs. another database lookup
method has anything to do with whether email users are virtual or not.  The
actual DATA that comes back from the lookup might.  But the method itself
should be transparent to the mail delivery decisions.  In another thread,
CDB was asked for, for a future Dovecot.  How do you feel about CDB?  Does
using CDB make users virtual or system?