On Jun 25, 2007, at 7:19 AM, Rudy Gevaert wrote:
> Sorry for picking up this old thread again,but with the latest
> thunderbird I don't have this problem.
They fixed it on the tbird trunk.
--
Jo Rhett
Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source
and other randomness
Jo Rhett wrote:
> Wolfgang Breyha wrote:
>> But it seems there was a change from 2.3.7 to 2.3.8 in handling legacy
>> flags.
>> At least a diff on lib/acl.c makes me think so. In 2.3.7 the flags
>> where added
>> "on-the-fly" and in 2.3.8 they are added permanently. If I'm right
>> that mean
What is "deleteright" set to on this server? You problem description
suggests that it's not set.
:wes
On 20 Apr 2007, at 05:50, Wolfgang Breyha wrote:
I don't know;-) Most of the mailboxes here have "lrswipkxtea" set. And
searching the source I found code in cmd_myrights, which adds "c"
an
Jo Rhett wrote:
Do we really have to write a script to loop through all
of the accounts and fix the ACLs for every folder?
Well if you find yourself needing to do this (I did) the following
script will save you a lot of time. This could possibly use improvement
to look for any write permissi
Wolfgang Breyha wrote:
But it seems there was a change from 2.3.7 to 2.3.8 in handling legacy flags.
At least a diff on lib/acl.c makes me think so. In 2.3.7 the flags where added
"on-the-fly" and in 2.3.8 they are added permanently. If I'm right that means
that I've to update all my ACLs to fix
Sebastian Hagedorn wrote, on 20.04.2007 11:00:
> I'm not sure I understand why. Are you saying that a 2.3.8 installed from
> scratch behaves differently than an upgraded one?
I don't know;-) Most of the mailboxes here have "lrswipkxtea" set. And
searching the source I found code in cmd_myrights,
--On 20. April 2007 10:46:49 +0200 Wolfgang Breyha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sebastian Hagedorn wrote, on 20.04.2007 10:00:
Hm, are there any other conditions necessary? Because I just tried TB 2
with our Cyrus 2.3.8 server and I was able to delete a message in my
INBOX just fine. I didn't ac
Sebastian Hagedorn wrote, on 20.04.2007 10:00:
> Hm, are there any other conditions necessary? Because I just tried TB 2
> with our Cyrus 2.3.8 server and I was able to delete a message in my INBOX
> just fine. I didn't actually check the protocol, so I can't see if TB did
> "myrights" and "geta
--On 19. April 2007 23:34:23 +0200 Wolfgang Breyha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I had troubles with cyrus 2.3.x and thunderbird 2.x. Thunderbird checks
the ACLs now and issues a "myrights" and "getacl" command. Since
thunderbird only checks RFC 2086 flags it disables "DELETE" access since
cyrus 2.
At Thu, 30 Nov 2006 12:43:13 -0500,
Ken Murchison wrote:
>
> I just moved the Cyrus 2.3 code to the trunk of CVS and created a
> cyrus-imapd-2_2-tail branch to be used for bug fixes to the 2.2 code.
ACK! I really hate that upside-down branching scheme you guys use.
Every time you do that you c
Ken Murchison wrote on 15/12/2005 23:43:
> Cristian Livadaru wrote:
>
>>hmmm that won't realz solve my "problem" or what easy way do I have to
>>create a sieve script for all users ? some automated way to do so.
>
> You could look at the "auto create" patch that is floating around on the
> list.
Cristian Livadaru wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:56:15PM -0500, Ken Murchison wrote:
Andrew Morgan wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Cristian Livadaru wrote:
Hi,
does Cyrus 2.3 have the option for global sieve scripts?
As far as I can remember somebody sayd once in the mailinglist that this
f
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:56:15PM -0500, Ken Murchison wrote:
> Andrew Morgan wrote:
> >On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Cristian Livadaru wrote:
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>does Cyrus 2.3 have the option for global sieve scripts?
> >>As far as I can remember somebody sayd once in the mailinglist that this
> >>feature wi
Andrew Morgan wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Cristian Livadaru wrote:
Hi,
does Cyrus 2.3 have the option for global sieve scripts?
As far as I can remember somebody sayd once in the mailinglist that this
feature will be in cyrus 2.3
In changes.html, I see:
# The Sieve "include" extension is no
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Cristian Livadaru wrote:
Hi,
does Cyrus 2.3 have the option for global sieve scripts?
As far as I can remember somebody sayd once in the mailinglist that this
feature will be in cyrus 2.3
In changes.html, I see:
# The Sieve "include" extension is now supported. This also
On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Amos wrote:
WRT 2.3, IIRC, there was a feature such that deleting a message would
not physically delete the message but just hide it from the user. That
way a recovery wouldn't require pulling stuff off of tape (assuming the
message was there last time backups ran.) Am I re
WRT 2.3, IIRC, there was a feature such that deleting a message would
not physically delete the message but just hide it from the user.
That way a recovery wouldn't require pulling stuff off of tape
(assuming the message was there last time backups ran.) Am I
remembering this correctly? (I have
Jim Bartus wrote:
Ken Murchison wrote:
Roland Pope wrote:
Hi,
Does anyone have any idea when Cyrus-IMAPd 2.3 might be ready for
production release?
There is no scheduled date, nor anyone to create a release at this time.
Pardon, I'm new to the list, but what does "nor anyone to cre
Generally, the releases are done by whomever is the current lead Cyrus
developer employed by Carnegie Mellon. That position is now vacant,
since Derrick Brashear left for greener pastures.
If the code gets to a point where it can be considered stable enough
for a release prior to us hiring anoth
ernational, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.webinternational.net
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-info-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Bartus
> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 12:56 PM
> To: Ken Murchison
> Cc: Roland Pope; info-cyrus@lists.an
Ken Murchison wrote:
Roland Pope wrote:
Hi,
Does anyone have any idea when Cyrus-IMAPd 2.3 might be ready for
production release?
There is no scheduled date, nor anyone to create a release at this time.
Pardon, I'm new to the list, but what does "nor anyone to create" imply?
Where ca
Roland Pope wrote:
Hi,
Does anyone have any idea when Cyrus-IMAPd 2.3 might be ready for
production release?
There is no scheduled date, nor anyone to create a release at this time.
--
Kenneth Murchison Oceana Matrix Ltd.
Software Engineer 21 Princeton Place
716-662-8973 x26 Or
Quoting Erik de Zeeuw ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Is there any expected release date for Cyrus 2.3 ?
I've been meaning to ask about this myself.
> It seems to add interesting features, and I was
> thus wondering when it will hit our servers :)
>
> I would be interested to give it a try, but was
> won
Ken Murchison wrote:
Sergio Devojno Bruder wrote:
Attila Nagy wrote:
Hello,
(...) The unified approach seems to be simple. The client no longer
has to be redirected to the given backend using the proxyd, or
lmtpproxyd (previously called frontend), instead it can turn to any
of the backends and t
Sergio Devojno Bruder wrote:
Attila Nagy wrote:
Hello,
(...) The unified approach seems to be simple. The client no longer
has to be redirected to the given backend using the proxyd, or
lmtpproxyd (previously called frontend), instead it can turn to any of
the backends and the backend will know
Attila Nagy wrote:
Hello,
(...)
The unified approach seems to be simple. The client no longer has to be
redirected to the given backend using the proxyd, or lmtpproxyd
(previously called frontend), instead it can turn to any of the backends
and the backend will know how to deal with that connec
Thomas Vogt wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 03.11.2004, 16:20 -0500 schrieb Ken Murchison:
IMAP2, so IMAP3 can't access mailboxes on STOR1. Does this work?
No. You're talking about two levels of synchronization here, the
current Murder code only handles the following scenarios.
Standard/Unified Murder:
Attila Nagy wrote:
Ken Murchison wrote:
In a standard config, the mailboxes.db on each IMAP server only
contains In a unified config, the master mailboxes.db is located on
the MUPDATE In a replicated config, the master mailboxes.db is located
on the
Thanks a lot, this enlightened my mind.
Repli
Thomas Vogt wrote:
{mail.domain.com}
+-+ +-+ +-+ +-+
|IMAP1| |IMAP2| |IMAP3| |IMAP4|
+--+--+ +--+--+ +--+--+ +--+--+
||||
+--+--+ +--+--+ +--+--+ +--+--+
|STOR1| |STOR2| |STOR3| |STOR4|
+-+ +-+ +-+ +-+
Lets say,
Ken Murchison wrote:
In a standard config, the mailboxes.db on each IMAP server only contains
In a unified config, the master mailboxes.db is located on the MUPDATE
In a replicated config, the master mailboxes.db is located on the
Thanks a lot, this enlightened my mind.
Replicated Murder seems t
Am Mittwoch, den 03.11.2004, 16:20 -0500 schrieb Ken Murchison:
> > IMAP2, so IMAP3 can't access mailboxes on STOR1. Does this work?
>
> No. You're talking about two levels of synchronization here, the
> current Murder code only handles the following scenarios.
>
>
> Standard/Unified Murder:
>
Attila Nagy wrote:
Ken Murchison wrote:
Is replicated murder consists of multiple backend server groups which
has the same mailboxes? So murder will say that user.jsmith is on
server1 AND server2, instead of just saying it's on server1 OR server2?
Yes. Any machine in the Murder has local access
Ken Murchison wrote:
Is replicated murder consists of multiple backend server groups which
has the same mailboxes? So murder will say that user.jsmith is on
server1 AND server2, instead of just saying it's on server1 OR server2?
Yes. Any machine in the Murder has local access to any mailbox.
Hmm
Attila Nagy wrote:
Hello,
There are the following lines in the changelog:
"Added support for "unified" and "replicated" Murders. A Murder no
longer has to have discrete frontend and backend servers; any one
"unified" server can both proxy and serve local mailboxes (proxy
functionality in proxyd
34 matches
Mail list logo
