Hi,
I'm planning the migration of our main cyrus server.
Actually the server is running cyrus imap 2.2.3 on a SuSE 9.1 i586, with about
130Gb of mailboxes.
My idea is moving to OpenSuse 10.3 with cyrus 2.3.8 on 64bit System.
I googled a bit, but i couldn't find anything useful; i would like to k
Hi,
I'm using Cyrus with saslauthd/OpenLDAP.
This is how my dit is now (test environment):
[root]
.ou=people
..
..cyrus admin dn
..ou=moodle
...ou=moodleinstall01
...
I'm using one cyrus admin dn, since I'm using only one imap server
at the moment. When I have
Hi All,
> Is your postfix running chrooted? If yes check in master.cf that at least
> lmtp is not running chrooted.
I was trying murder on Fed box and came across this on
http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/imapd/install-murder.html
Delivering mail
To deliver mail to your Murder, configure your MTA just
On Nov 26, 2007 11:04 AM, Giuseppe Ravasio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm planning the migration of our main cyrus server.
> Actually the server is running cyrus imap 2.2.3 on a SuSE 9.1 i586, with about
> 130Gb of mailboxes.
> My idea is moving to OpenSuse 10.3 with cyrus 2.3.8 on 64bit Sy
Hello,
i'm answering on this thread because it is the most recent one and I
have the same problem like many other people here with vacation and sieve.
I found this thread:
http://www.imc.org/ietf-mta-filters/mail-archive/msg00898.html
about vacation working if localpart of reveivers emailaddress
On 26 Nov 2007, at 05:49, Lauro Costa G. Borges wrote:
> the cyrus admin dn bind succeeds but saslauthd complains about
> having two DN's matching the UID attribute (remember I have copies of
> the user entries for the moodle service, since each moodle
> installation has/can see -only- the users
On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 07:58:03PM -0500, Wesley Craig wrote:
> On 24 Nov 2007, at 11:05, Diego Woitasen wrote:
> >I didn't put these lines because rh-cluster1 is the master server. I
> >have only two machines, rh-cluster1 (master) and rh-cluster2 (slave).
> >Is really necessary that rh-cluster1 m
>> Note that ext3 effectively does the same thing as ZFS on fsync() - because
>> the journal layer is block based and does no know which block belongs
>> to which file, the entire journal must be applied to the filesystem to
>> achieve the expected fsync() symantics (at least, with data=ordered,
>>
On 26 Nov 2007, at 20:31, Diego Woitasen wrote:
> It's working now. I will publish the results of my testing in a few
> days. I can't find to much information about this setup.
Yours is the first site that I've encountered with that particular
setup. I like it :) Especially for a small site.
>> Certainly data journalling is the exception, rather than the rule.
>> Off the top of my head, I can't think of another mainstream
>> filesystem that does it (aside from the various log-structured
>> filesystems such as Waffle and Reiser4).
>
>AFAIK you get it with UFS + gjournal, dunno if that c
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Andrew McNamara wrote:
> Certainly data journalling is the exception, rather than the rule.
> Off the top of my head, I can't think of another mainstream
> filesystem that does it (aside from the various log-structured
> filesystems such as Waffle and Reiser4).
AFAIK you get i
11 matches
Mail list logo
