Bob Gustafson | 10 Jan 04:47 2006

Re: dovecot-lda: problems compiling

The command to fix is 'up2date gettext', not 'update gettext'

On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 10:47 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 19:44 -0500, nospam wrote:
> > I am trying to compile the dovecot lda and running into some problems.
> > (compiling most recent version on Fedora core 4).
> > 
> > I was able to compile the dovecot imap server just fine.  However ..
> > when I try to run configure in the lda package (after running autogen)
> > it gets stuck on this line :
> > 
> > + eval 'sed -f ./confstatm19105/subs-1.sed | sed
> > -f ./confstatm19105/subs-2.sed | sed -f ./confstatm19105/subs-3.sed'
> > ++ sed -f ./confstatm19105/subs-1.sed
> > ++ sed -f ./confstatm19105/subs-2.sed
> > ++ sed -f ./confstatm19105/subs-3.sed
> 
> 64bit Fedora? Yes, seen this there. Don't know if it has been reported
> to Redhat yet.
> 
> 

Yes, I reported it. The fix is to do 'update gettext' and then recreate
the dovecot and dovecot-lda directories from cvs (do 'co' command) and
go through the autogen process again. You will not that the AM_ICONV
diagnostic is not there any more (gettext fixed that one).

You many get a diagnostic from the dovecot-lda autogen stage that a file
config.in.am (I am doing this from memory - may be slightly off) is
missing. If you look at the directory, that file has been generated, but
(Continue reading)

Timo Sirainen | 10 Jan 09:38 2006
Picon
Picon

Re: How long to 1.0?

On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 16:46 -0800, Kenneth Porter wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 10, 2006 12:25 AM +0100 Fredrik Tolf 
> <fredrik <at> dolda2000.com> wrote:
> 
> > I'm wondering how close Dovecot can be said to be to 1.0 "Final".
> 
> >From a developer's perspective, a better question is, "What's the roadmap?" 
> What milestones are still unmet before 1.0 can be "released"?

Mostly I just want to get bugs fixed. People still report some
annoyingly difficult to reproduce bugs from time to time..

I guess I could release 1.0beta1 soon since my latest changes don't seem
to be broken. Except I see this crash now:

PAX: execution attempt in: <NULL>, 00000000-00000000 00000000
PAX: terminating task: /usr/local/libexec/dovecot/imap(imap):12023,
uid/euid: 1020/1020, PC: 00000000, SP: 5da5ef9c

Maybe it's because of the IDLE changes. If someone can reproduce it,
please tell me how :)

Henti Smith | 10 Jan 10:35 2006
Picon

Re: new 1.0 config and vpopmail

On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 20:59:12 -0500
John Peacock <jpeacock <at> rowman.com> wrote:

> Henti Smith wrote:
> > does anybody have a working config they can send me .. I just cannot
> > seem to get this working. 
> 
> You haven't given us enough to go on.  vpopmail is capable of being
> configured in numerous ways (for example all virtual domains, no
> local users, or some combination thereof).

Sorry, 

All virtual domains using mysql. I use gentoo so I'm not 100% sure what
compile flags, but I'll check for you. 

I've attached my previos config that worked for previos version of
config 

/etc/dovecot.config 

auth = default
auth_mechanisms = plain
auth_passdb = vpopmail
auth_user = root
auth_userdb = vpopmail
default_mail_env = maildir:%h/.maildir
first_valid_uid = 500
last_valid_uid = 0
login = imap
(Continue reading)

Miquel van Smoorenburg | 10 Jan 10:34 2006
Picon

Re: How long to 1.0?

On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 10:38 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 16:46 -0800, Kenneth Porter wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 10, 2006 12:25 AM +0100 Fredrik Tolf 
> > <fredrik <at> dolda2000.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > I'm wondering how close Dovecot can be said to be to 1.0 "Final".
> > 
> > >From a developer's perspective, a better question is, "What's the roadmap?" 
> > What milestones are still unmet before 1.0 can be "released"?
> 
> Mostly I just want to get bugs fixed. People still report some
> annoyingly difficult to reproduce bugs from time to time..
> 
> I guess I could release 1.0beta1 soon since my latest changes don't seem
> to be broken. Except I see this crash now:
> 
> PAX: execution attempt in: <NULL>, 00000000-00000000 00000000
> PAX: terminating task: /usr/local/libexec/dovecot/imap(imap):12023,
> uid/euid: 1020/1020, PC: 00000000, SP: 5da5ef9c
> 
> Maybe it's because of the IDLE changes. If someone can reproduce it,
> please tell me how :)

I'm probably not telling you anything new, so I might be stating the
obvious, but: have you ever tried valgrind ? Highly recommended.

Mike.

Tom Alsberg | 10 Jan 11:39 2006
X-Face
Picon
Picon

Thunderbird, IDLE, mailbox not always SELECTed

Hi there.

Although it does not seem to be a Dovecot issue, I'm sending this here
as people in this list may know better where exactly the problem is.

I am working on Dovecot 1.0 (.alpha5, right now), with the aim that
when Dovecot becomes stable we can put that into production.  Recently
after being more clear with the behaviour (I'm most into namespaces
and mbox/maildir mixing issues, as you can see from my past messages),
I have adopted a few (two, right now, with the third one gone)
"Guinea-Pigs" to use the experimental IMAP server - people who very
much want an IMAP service here and thus may help me test bugs.

One of them reported, that he does not always see new mail.  That user
is using Mozilla Thunderbird (1.0.7).  Looking a bit with him at the
workings, I can see the issue.  He has the IDLE extension enabled.
However when sniffing the network, I see that sometimes when switching
to another mailbox, the SELECT command is not always sent to the
server.  At the beginning, INBOX is (always) selected.  Then another
mailbox is selected, and usually a SELECT command is sent and the
mailbox is seen.  But going back to INBOX again, often no "SELECT
INBOX" is seen on the wire.  Then of course he sees no "EXISTS" or
anything like that.

I wonder if anyone else has observed this, or in some other way, that
Thunderbird does not always show new mail.

Sometimes it appears that a mailbox is selected in Thunderbird, and
Thunderbird immediately (remembering from its cache) does a FETCH to
show the message in the mailbox/folder, but not SELECT to update the
(Continue reading)

Tom Alsberg | 10 Jan 12:03 2006
X-Face
Picon
Picon

IMAP subscriptions - how, for what and why?

Again, not a Dovecot issua - but can someone clarify better what IMAP
subscriptions (SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE/LSUB) are and what they are used
for?

I've seen a few times in Microsoft mail clients, the options to
subscribe to folders and to "show only subscribed folders".  I haven't
played much with them, though.  But what's the actual point?  Except
for being returned in the list of LSUB, what else changes when doing a
SUBSCRIBE to a mailbox?

Are subscriptions supposed to be remembered by the server outside of
the context of a session (so a client that connects to the server at
some point and authenticates will already see in LSUB what a possibly
other client has subscribed to in a previous session)?

  Clarifications appreciated, regards,
  -- Tom

--

-- 
  Tom Alsberg - hacker (being the best description fitting this space)
  Web page:	http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~alsbergt/
DISCLAIMER:  The above message does not even necessarily represent what
my fingers have typed on the keyboard, save anything further.

Timo Sirainen | 10 Jan 12:09 2006
Picon
Picon

Re: Thunderbird, IDLE, mailbox not always SELECTed

On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 12:39 +0200, Tom Alsberg wrote:
> One of them reported, that he does not always see new mail.  That user
> is using Mozilla Thunderbird (1.0.7).  Looking a bit with him at the
> workings, I can see the issue.  He has the IDLE extension enabled.

I've fixed a couple of problems with IDLE since alpha5. Maybe those will
help?

> However when sniffing the network, I see that sometimes when switching
> to another mailbox, the SELECT command is not always sent to the
> server.  At the beginning, INBOX is (always) selected.  Then another
> mailbox is selected, and usually a SELECT command is sent and the
> mailbox is seen.  But going back to INBOX again, often no "SELECT
> INBOX" is seen on the wire.  Then of course he sees no "EXISTS" or
> anything like that.

Thunderbird by default uses multiple IMAP connections. Did you check the
others?

Timo Sirainen | 10 Jan 12:10 2006
Picon
Picon

Re: IMAP subscriptions - how, for what and why?

On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 13:03 +0200, Tom Alsberg wrote:
> Again, not a Dovecot issua - but can someone clarify better what IMAP
> subscriptions (SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE/LSUB) are and what they are used
> for?

Pretty much the only point of subscriptions is that you don't have to
look at all the mailboxes that server has to offer. This is especially
useful if you have tens or hundreds of shared/public mailboxes (eg.
mailing lists or some news gateway or whatever).

Marc Perkel | 10 Jan 12:24 2006

Re: How long to 1.0?



Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 16:46 -0800, Kenneth Porter wrote:
On Tuesday, January 10, 2006 12:25 AM +0100 Fredrik Tolf <fredrik <at> dolda2000.com> wrote:
I'm wondering how close Dovecot can be said to be to 1.0 "Final".
>From a developer's perspective, a better question is, "What's the roadmap?" What milestones are still unmet before 1.0 can be "released"?
Mostly I just want to get bugs fixed. People still report some annoyingly difficult to reproduce bugs from time to time..

Timo,

For what it's worth, you are a perfectionist. Far more than most other programmers. Most 1,0 versions of software aren't early as solid as your current Alpha version. I'm not suggesting that you lower your standards to everyone elses level but no one expects a 1.0 version to be perfect. In comparison, think about how buggy the current versions of Firefox and Thunderbird are. By your standatds they wouldn't even be up to Alpha even today.

And - I can tell you that the Alpha label is definitely hurting you and my recommendation as a person with marketing experience is do one or two beta versions, call it done and then 1.0 and then start fixing it. If you do that and you get a lot more people on board then other people will help you track down your bugs.

I don't know what other people think, if we can do a quick poll here, but comparing the current Alpha 5 to other 1.0 version of software, I think Dovecot is way more solid than most 1.0 versions. In fact, I'd give it a 1.3 if it were me. (Hope this makes sense to everyone.)
Udo Rader | 10 Jan 12:30 2006
Picon

Re: How long to 1.0?

On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 03:24 -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
> I don't know what other people think, if we can do a quick poll here,
> but comparing the current Alpha 5 to other 1.0 version of software, I
> think Dovecot is way more solid than most 1.0 versions. In fact, I'd
> give it a 1.3 if it were me. (Hope this makes sense to everyone.)

In fact, if 1.0 ever comes out, it will certainly be the most stable 1.0
piece of software that I have ever dealt with :-)

Udo Rader

--

-- 
bestsolution.at EDV Systemhaus GmbH
http://www.bestsolution.at

Gmane