Possibly fixes the mail-cache-transaction assert.
Passdb and userdb configuration changed. New format is:
passdb sql { args = /etc/dovecot-sql.conf } passdb pam { } userdb passwd { }
The above would first try to authenticate from SQL database, if it failed because user wasn't found, or password was wrong, it would then try PAM. The same is done for userdbs.
I'll probably do some other configuration file changes still before v1.0. I'm also thinking about having a separate config process which can read the actual configuration from files or sql.
Timo Sirainen wrote:
Possibly fixes the mail-cache-transaction assert.
Show of hands: How many people are running the 1.0-test series in a production environment and how many users are you supporting?
I'm trying to decide on 0.99.x or 1.0.x for the new server I am building. I've set the Reply-To to my own address; I'll post a summary based on the responses I get (to keep the noise down on the list).
TIA
John
-- John Peacock Director of Information Research and Technology Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group 4501 Forbes Boulevard Suite H Lanham, MD 20706 301-459-3366 x.5010 fax 301-429-5748
At 19:37 9-3-2005, John Peacock wrote:
Show of hands: How many people are running the 1.0-test series in a production environment and how many users are you supporting?
We're running Dovecot 1.0-stable (since we needed the mailspace feature of the 1.0 series) in an university environment. We migrated to Docecot in the weekend of 26th february and up until now we have almost 1000 unique users. We have about 3000 users in our passwd database, so I expect the number of unique users to grow.
As you maybe have seen on the list, we had a few problems. One of them is OS related (Solaris only supports 256 filedescriptors by default and that wasn't enough), the other problem is Dovecot 1.0 related: Pine and Outlook Express users cannot see in the mail index who sent them mail (the 'from' field is empty). Dovecot 0.99 didn't have this problem. I'm still waiting for an answer from TImo about this issue.
Bottom line: I like Dovecot a lot; it's fast, stable and easy to support.
Best regards,
Remy Zandwijk
Free University of Amsterdam
The Netherlands. Hi Remy,
Which version of 1.0-stable are you running? Which version of pine?
I'm using 1.0-stable from 2002-02-25 (test-59) and i have a few pine users (pine-4.44) connecting via IMAPS to port 993. Both the client and server OS is Linux.
Just as a point of reference, i don't see the problems you've described. I had similar issues with squirrelmail when i converted, however an upgrade of squirrelmail fixed my issues. Is the version of pine you're using current?
...alex...
Remy Zandwijk wrote:
At 19:37 9-3-2005, John Peacock wrote:
Show of hands: How many people are running the 1.0-test series in a production environment and how many users are you supporting?
We're running Dovecot 1.0-stable (since we needed the mailspace feature of the 1.0 series) in an university environment. We migrated to Docecot in the weekend of 26th february and up until now we have almost 1000 unique users. We have about 3000 users in our passwd database, so I expect the number of unique users to grow.
As you maybe have seen on the list, we had a few problems. One of them is OS related (Solaris only supports 256 filedescriptors by default and that wasn't enough), the other problem is Dovecot 1.0 related: Pine and Outlook Express users cannot see in the mail index who sent them mail (the 'from' field is empty). Dovecot 0.99 didn't have this problem. I'm still waiting for an answer from TImo about this issue.
Bottom line: I like Dovecot a lot; it's fast, stable and easy to support.
Best regards,
Remy Zandwijk Free University of Amsterdam The Netherlands.
Hi Alex, list...
Which version of 1.0-stable are you running? Which version of pine?
It's Dovecot 1.0-stable test-59, like you're running. Pine is version 4.62.
I'm using 1.0-stable from 2002-02-25 (test-59) and i have a few pine users (pine-4.44) connecting via IMAPS to port 993. Both the client and server OS is Linux.
Just as a point of reference, i don't see the problems you've described. I had similar issues with squirrelmail when i converted, however an upgrade of squirrelmail fixed my issues. Is the version of pine you're using current?
I believe it's the latest Pine version. Outlook Express is the latest too.
We've a test server which runs Sendmail as MTA and Procmail as MDA. When using Dovecot 0.99 we have no problems with the 'from' fields or whatsoever. When using the same test server, nothing changed regarding the setup of Sendmail/Procmail, but using Dovecot 1.0 we've the problems.
When running
MAIL=~/Maildir /opt/dovecot/bin/imap
and use the command 'x fetch 1 envelope', the result is:
* 1 FETCH (ENVELOPE ("Sun, 6 Mar 2005 14:52:06 +0100 (MET)" "Test" NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL "<Pine.GSO.4.62.0503061452001.24401@pseudorca>"))
In other words, no 'from' info.
Since you're running the same version of Dovecot without problems, maybe the wrong link is the mail delivery. Could someone send me an ZIPped Maildir with a few test emails? Is someone using the same MTA/MDA combination? If so, what is your sendmail/procmail config?
On the other hand: the right info is in the mail files, otherwise other email clients wouldn't work, right?
Thanks for your interest :)
-Remy
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 08:12:23PM +0100, Remy Zandwijk wrote:
At 19:37 9-3-2005, John Peacock wrote:
Show of hands: How many people are running the 1.0-test series in a production environment and how many users are you supporting?
We're running Dovecot 1.0-stable (since we needed the mailspace feature of the 1.0 series) in an university environment. We migrated to Docecot in the weekend of 26th february and up until now we have almost 1000 unique users. We have about 3000 users in our passwd database, so I expect the number of unique users to grow.
As you maybe have seen on the list, we had a few problems. One of them is OS related (Solaris only supports 256 filedescriptors by default and that wasn't enough), the other problem is Dovecot 1.0 related: Pine and Outlook Express users cannot see in the mail index who sent them mail (the 'from' field is empty). Dovecot 0.99 didn't have this problem. I'm still waiting for an answer from TImo about this issue.
Bottom line: I like Dovecot a lot; it's fast, stable and easy to support.
Pretty much the same here, only 10 times less users, but no problems with PINE, mutt or Thunderbird. Outlook is actually forbidden here. ;)
-- Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <rathann*at*icm.edu.pl> Interdisciplinary Centre for Mathematical and Computational Modelling Warsaw University | http://www.icm.edu.pl | tel. +48 (22) 5540810
Hi:
I am not english speak.
a configure protocols imap and imaps, create certificate in
/etc/ssl/certificados/privado.pem
and
/etc/ssl/certificados/publico.pem
in the Apache work fine this certs.
In Dovecot config:
ssl_disable = no ssl_cert_file = /usr/share/ssl/certificados/publico.pem ssl_key_file = /usr/share/ssl/certificados/privado.pem
a execute /usr/local/sbin/dovecot netstat showme LISTEN 143 but not 993
i put only imaps and not LISTEN in the port associate.
Whats a step for config imaps?
Thanks
Alberto CIC
celtita wrote:
In Dovecot config:
ssl_disable = no ssl_cert_file = /usr/share/ssl/certificados/publico.pem ssl_key_file = /usr/share/ssl/certificados/privado.pem
a execute /usr/local/sbin/dovecot netstat showme LISTEN 143 but not 993
i put only imaps and not LISTEN in the port associate.
In your dovecot.conf, do you have:
protocols = imap imaps
You must have imaps in your protocols line for IMAPS to be used. Also make sure that ssl_disable is NOT set.
Andrew
Cat /etc/services
telnets 992/tcp telnets 992/udp imaps 993/tcp # IMAP over SSL imaps 993/udp # IMAP over SSL ircs 994/tcp ircs 994/udp pop3s 995/tcp # POP-3 over SSL pop3s 995/udp # POP-3 over SSL
uname OpenBSD 3.5 dovecot 1.0test Postfix latest release
Netstat -an And 993 not work.
Any example configuration wiht imaps working?
Thanks
-----Mensaje original----- De: dovecot-bounces@dovecot.org [mailto:dovecot-bounces@dovecot.org] En nombre de Andrew Boothman Enviado el: Jueves, 10 de Marzo de 2005 11:32 Para: celtita CC: dovecot@dovecot.org Asunto: Re: [Dovecot] 1.0-test
celtita wrote:
In Dovecot config:
ssl_disable = no ssl_cert_file = /usr/share/ssl/certificados/publico.pem ssl_key_file = /usr/share/ssl/certificados/privado.pem
a execute /usr/local/sbin/dovecot netstat showme LISTEN 143 but not 993
i put only imaps and not LISTEN in the port associate.
In your dovecot.conf, do you have:
protocols = imap imaps
You must have imaps in your protocols line for IMAPS to be used. Also make sure that ssl_disable is NOT set.
Andrew
Iam see in the config.log (dovecot compile from sources)
config.log:/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lssl config.log:ac_cv_lib_ssl_SSL_read=no config.log:ssldir='/usr/share/ssl'
?? thanks
-----Mensaje original----- De: dovecot-bounces@dovecot.org [mailto:dovecot-bounces@dovecot.org] En nombre de celtita Enviado el: Jueves, 10 de Marzo de 2005 12:01 Para: dovecot@dovecot.org Asunto: RE: [Dovecot] 1.0-test
Cat /etc/services
telnets 992/tcp telnets 992/udp imaps 993/tcp # IMAP over SSL imaps 993/udp # IMAP over SSL ircs 994/tcp ircs 994/udp pop3s 995/tcp # POP-3 over SSL pop3s 995/udp # POP-3 over SSL
uname OpenBSD 3.5 dovecot 1.0test Postfix latest release
Netstat -an And 993 not work.
Any example configuration wiht imaps working?
Thanks
-----Mensaje original----- De: dovecot-bounces@dovecot.org [mailto:dovecot-bounces@dovecot.org] En nombre de Andrew Boothman Enviado el: Jueves, 10 de Marzo de 2005 11:32 Para: celtita CC: dovecot@dovecot.org Asunto: Re: [Dovecot] 1.0-test
celtita wrote:
In Dovecot config:
ssl_disable = no ssl_cert_file = /usr/share/ssl/certificados/publico.pem ssl_key_file = /usr/share/ssl/certificados/privado.pem
a execute /usr/local/sbin/dovecot netstat showme LISTEN 143 but not 993
i put only imaps and not LISTEN in the port associate.
In your dovecot.conf, do you have:
protocols = imap imaps
You must have imaps in your protocols line for IMAPS to be used. Also make sure that ssl_disable is NOT set.
Andrew
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 02:30:15PM -0300, celtita wrote:
Iam see in the config.log (dovecot compile from sources)
config.log:/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lssl config.log:ac_cv_lib_ssl_SSL_read=no config.log:ssldir='/usr/share/ssl'
You need to have openssl development files (headers) installed.
-- Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <rathann*at*icm.edu.pl> Interdisciplinary Centre for Mathematical and Computational Modelling Warsaw University | http://www.icm.edu.pl | tel. +48 (22) 5540810
Hi John,
We use 1.0 stable branch here, LVS director to round robin to 2 servers. A third server as Exim receiver / NFS for them + backed up hourly (backup can act as a read-only plug in replacement for NFS upon failure), authing via MySql slaves on each server. Currently have somewhere in the region of 5000 accounts connecting to them with another 1000 to migrating over the next few weeks. The 2 dovecot servers also act as round robin for our MX1. The system loads for all of this is so low it is almost unmeasurable.
Regards Andrew
John Peacock wrote:
Timo Sirainen wrote:
Possibly fixes the mail-cache-transaction assert.
Show of hands: How many people are running the 1.0-test series in a production environment and how many users are you supporting?
I'm trying to decide on 0.99.x or 1.0.x for the new server I am building. I've set the Reply-To to my own address; I'll post a summary based on the responses I get (to keep the noise down on the list).
TIA
John
-- Andrew Hutchings Linux Guru Netserve Consultants Ltd. http://www.domaincity.co.uk/
Timo Sirainen wrote:
Possibly fixes the mail-cache-transaction assert.
Passdb and userdb configuration changed. New format is:
passdb sql { args = /etc/dovecot-sql.conf } passdb pam { } userdb passwd { }
The above would first try to authenticate from SQL database, if it failed because user wasn't found, or password was wrong, it would then try PAM. The same is done for userdbs.
I'll probably do some other configuration file changes still before v1.0. I'm also thinking about having a separate config process which can read the actual configuration from files or sql.
When do you suspect 1.0 will be out? Are the above fixes backported to 1.0-stable?
// Tom
participants (9)
-
Alex Tang
-
Andrew Boothman
-
Andrew Hutchings
-
celtita
-
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
-
John Peacock
-
Remy Zandwijk
-
Timo Sirainen
-
Tom Sommer