Re: [SM-USERS] Problems with hotmail dropping mail sent via Squirrelmail

2007-07-18 Thread M. Fioretti
On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 00:55:55 AM -0400, Ian Evans ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Just wanted to quickly update this issue: > > 1) Email sent from our domain to hotmail.com IS delivered if sent via > Outlook or Thunderbird > 2) Email sent from our domain to hotmail.com IS delivered if sent via a > s

Re: [SM-USERS] Problems with hotmail dropping mail sent via Squirrelmail

2007-07-18 Thread Ian Evans
Just wanted to quickly update this issue: After double checking any scripts (thanks for feedback, send to a friend) that we have that use the mail() function, they are getting through to a hotmail inbox. So... 1) Email sent from our domain to hotmail.com IS delivered if sent via Outlook or Thund

Re: [SM-USERS] Problems with hotmail dropping mail sent via Squirrelmail

2007-07-18 Thread Chris Hilts
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ian Evans wrote: > I've noticed that mail sent by a program like outlook or thunderbird will > make it through, but email sent via the php mail() function or via > squirrelmail is not making it. I haven't noticed this issue myself. That said, I'd lik

[SM-USERS] Problems with hotmail dropping mail sent via Squirrelmail

2007-07-18 Thread Ian Evans
Been having fun with the hotmail mail server accepting mail from our domain, queuing it for delivery and then dropping it. Doesn't reach the inbox, junk, anything. I've noticed that mail sent by a program like outlook or thunderbird will make it through, but email sent via the php mail() function

Re: [SM-USERS] Remove SM Version Info From Splash Page?

2007-07-18 Thread Paul Lesniewski
> Guys - I have been looking all over for a way to disable the version info on > SM client running on my mail server (RHEL4). I hate waving this flag for > anyone to know exactly what I am running. Is there somewhere in SM that will > allow me to stop showing this info? I believe I asked this befor

Re: [SM-USERS] Squirrelmail attaching previously sent emails to new emails (and session_register(), require_once(), fread(), and fclose() errors)

2007-07-18 Thread Paul Lesniewski
On 7/18/07, Shawn Hargan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A user replicated this issue for us again today and received the > following error when sending the message that included the previously > sent attachments: Woa, "previously sent attachments"? Your original problem description mentioned nothin

Re: [SM-USERS] Squirrelmail attaching previously sent emails to new emails (and session_register(), require_once(), fread(), and fclose() errors)

2007-07-18 Thread Shawn Hargan
A user replicated this issue for us again today and received the following error when sending the message that included the previously sent attachments: Warning: filesize() [function.filesize]: stat failed for /u/webmail/squirrelmail_attachments/bkxNmcFmJdisbAuWLywzEOU8MpLi9lNF in /u/webmail/s

Re: [SM-USERS] concurrent SM sessions on a single client box - different browsers?

2007-07-18 Thread Alan in Toronto
On Wed, July 18, 2007 4:03 am, Paul Lesniewski wrote: > On 7/18/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> SquirrelMail 1.4.9a >> >> I know that a well-known issue is that you can't have concurrent SM sessions >> on a >> single client box. Doing so can result in corrupted or miswritten pref

Re: [SM-USERS] concurrent SM sessions on a single client box - different browsers?

2007-07-18 Thread Tomas Kuliavas
> SquirrelMail 1.4.9a > > I know that a well-known issue is that you can't have concurrent SM sessions > on a single client box. Doing so can result in corrupted or miswritten pref > files. > > Can the problem be avoided if the concurrent SM sessions on the single box > are in two different br

Re: [SM-USERS] concurrent SM sessions on a single client box - different browsers?

2007-07-18 Thread Alexandros G. Fragkiadakis
On Wed, July 18, 2007 10:56, Alan in Toronto wrote: > SquirrelMail 1.4.9a > > > I know that a well-known issue is that you can't have concurrent SM > sessions on a single client box. Doing so can result in corrupted or > miswritten pref files. > > Can the problem be avoided if the concurrent SM ses

Re: [SM-USERS] concurrent SM sessions on a single client box - different browsers?

2007-07-18 Thread Paul Lesniewski
On 7/18/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > SquirrelMail 1.4.9a > > I know that a well-known issue is that you can't have concurrent SM sessions > on a > single client box. Doing so can result in corrupted or miswritten pref files. > > Can the problem be avoided if the concurrent SM s

[SM-USERS] concurrent SM sessions on a single client box - different browsers?

2007-07-18 Thread Alan in Toronto
SquirrelMail 1.4.9a I know that a well-known issue is that you can't have concurrent SM sessions on a single client box. Doing so can result in corrupted or miswritten pref files. Can the problem be avoided if the concurrent SM sessions on the single box are in two different browsers? e.g. one