Hi everyone, I've been trying to get Squirrelmail running on my system, but I'm getting nowwhere with this particular error. I'm running squirrelmail on FreeBSD4.8, squirrelmail version 1.4.2
ERROR Error connecting to IMAP server: . 2 : No such file or directory I have imap enabled in inetd.conf. I'm not seeing any error messages in my apache log, or in maillog. It looks like the login process doesn't actually get to the point where it tries to log in. It just "fails" the login without actually checking the uname/pword from what I can see. Can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks! -- Tim DeBoer It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Send squirrelmail-users mailing list submissions to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-users > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of squirrelmail-users digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Squirrelmail as the only MUA (Bruce Richardson) > 2. Re: Squirrelmail as the only MUA (Tilman Schmidt) > 3. Re: Squirrelmail as the only MUA (Paul Elliott) > 4. Re: TMDA (C.B. Currier) > 5. utlility app for importing text Addressbook (C.B. Currier) > 6. Delete Attachments ONLY (Daniel Watts) > 7. 553 and language (Graham Rimmington) > 8. Re: TMDA (p dont think) > 9. Re: TMDA (Bruce Richardson) > 10. Re: Re: ERROR : Connection dropped by imap-server. (Chris Hilts) > 11. Re: Delete Attachments ONLY (Marc Groot Koerkamp) > 12. Re: 553 and language (Tomas Kuliavas) > 13. Re: Squirrelmail as the only MUA (Avery Day) > > --__--__-- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 12:09:10 +0100 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SM-USERS] Squirrelmail as the only MUA > From: Bruce Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Tue, Apr 06, 2004 at 10:44:16PM -0700, Avery Day wrote: > > Does anyone think going completely webmail based using squirrelmail for > > the MUA is a bad idea? Does anyone have any thoughts on this at all? Is > > there anyone in this mailing list that has done this before? If so I would > > love to hear about how it has worked out. > > We've done this. We encountered incredible hostility from a small > minority, resentment or resignation from a larger minority, positive > feedback from a significant minority. > > You'll need to examine what they can currently do with their mail > clients and be able to offer similar functions or workarounds. One > major lack in Squirrel is multiple address books. I have solved this by > patching Squirrel to consult a table (we use database storage for > addresses and preferences) to see which books are available to the user > and providing external pages to allow staff to create, edit and share > these books. The groups plugin is also not really what is needed for an > organisation's single MUA, so I added another hack to Squirrel so that > it treats address books (the additional ones created by users) as > groups. This works by having an additional, virtual book that contains > an entry for each real book, with a very funny e-mail address for each. > We also use the Autocomplete plugin, so IE users can just type in the > name of the book in the To/CC/Bcc boxes. Another piece of hackery then > detects the book, strips it out and inserts the actual recipients. > > I really need to feed this back to the SquirrelMail community but I'm > very busy and it requires some rewrites to the basic addressbook code. > > As for your hardware, I'd recommend going dual processor. Frees up a > lot of bottlenecks. Put the IMAP mailstore and SquirrelMail on > different servers and (if you can) put an extra NIC in both machines and > give them a dedicated link on a special subnet. > > -- > Bruce > > If the universe were simple enough to be understood, we would be too > simple to understand it. > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 13:21:47 +0200 > From: Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Organization: Phoenix Software GmbH > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SM-USERS] Squirrelmail as the only MUA > > Avery Day wrote: > > postfix+procmail+dovcot-imap+spamassassin+squirrelmail server [...] > > We are looking at going completely > > webmail based for the MUA in our company using squirrelmail. We have > > around 35 users and only 6 gigs of email. My guess is we send and receive > > as a whole on average about 300 emails a day total. > > > > Does anyone think going completely webmail based using squirrelmail for > > the MUA is a bad idea? > > Certainly not. Quite to the contrary. There are setups where this is the > way to go. > > > Does anyone have any thoughts on this at all? Is > > there anyone in this mailing list that has done this before? If so I would > > love to hear about how it has worked out. > > I am hosting around 100 mail customers on a > Sendmail+Cyrus+SpamAssassin+SquirrelMail server. Quite a number of them > (I guess around 30%) are so pleased with SquirrelMail they have ditched > their regular mail client (the one whose name starts with 'O'.) Others > use a regular client at home but access their mail via SquirrelMail from > abroad. > > > I will be running this server on a PE2650, raid 5, single xeon 2.4Ghz, > > with 1 gig of ram. I think this server can handle what I need it for easy > > enough. Does anyone see this differently? > > Should be ample. Mine is a 1 GHz P4 with half a gig of RAM, and it > performs very well. No signs of overload. But I wouldn't use RAID5. > Plain mirroring performs better and is more reliable, IMHO. > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 12:42:42 +0100 (BST) > Subject: Re: [SM-USERS] Squirrelmail as the only MUA > From: "Paul Elliott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > On Tue, Apr 06, 2004 at 10:44:16PM -0700, Avery Day wrote: > >> Does anyone think going completely webmail based using squirrelmail for > >> the MUA is a bad idea? Does anyone have any thoughts on this at all? Is > >> there anyone in this mailing list that has done this before? If so I > >> would > >> love to hear about how it has worked out. > > We've done this. We encountered incredible hostility from a small > > minority, resentment or resignation from a larger minority, positive > > feedback from a significant minority. > > Us too. We used to use a free system called Mercury but it was hugely > unpopular due to speed/reliability. We now use Qmail/Courier and > SquirrelMail as our only supported MUA. We currently have 5000 users and > it works like a charm. > > > You'll need to examine what they can currently do with their mail > > clients and be able to offer similar functions or workarounds. One > > major lack in Squirrel is multiple address books. I have solved this by > > patching Squirrel to consult a table (we use database storage for > <snip> > > We had similar issues. I took the same route as yourself, patching and > adding features as requested. > > > As for your hardware, I'd recommend going dual processor. Frees up a > > lot of bottlenecks. Put the IMAP mailstore and SquirrelMail on > > different servers and (if you can) put an extra NIC in both machines and > > give them a dedicated link on a special subnet. > > I would definetely agree here. We have a single Xeon CPU at the moment > (3Ghz) but it does struggle a little at times (when performing large mail > shots.) I've also found, for us at least, memory is also an issue. We > currently have 512 and the server now and again goes into swap due to the > sheer amount of concurrent users. We're adding another 512 next week so it > should solve that problem. :-) > > --- > Paul Elliott, Network Technician > Bishop Burton College (01964) 553000 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 07:32:26 -0400 (EDT) > Subject: Re: [SM-USERS] TMDA > From: "C.B. Currier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > What is the status of these tools? > > I saw that the TMDA plugin had been moved to obsolete & a reference is > made to TMDA tools but cannot find them. > > I have TMDA working great on the incoming with qmail but outgoing I have > not gotten working with SM & was hoping to find or develop some better > functionality. So I am curious as to where the development is on this > plugin. I also can assist in some of the debugging/development if > possible. > > Is there a CVS for this, who do I contact? > > -- > C.B. Currier > > > p dont think said: > > Just a follow-up given some new information... > > > >> I'm thinking of installing the plugin TMDA but i have one concern and > >> would like to knwo the answer before installing it. > >> > >> Once TMDA is install and the TMDA plugin for squirrelmail is install > >> on my SMTP server, can my users, enable or disable the TMDA features > >> on thier mail box? > > > > Yes, the two are fairly independent. There is a problem in that the > > outgoing addresses created by the tmda-sendmail wrapper may not be > > "reply-able", depending on your system setup. > > > > The current TMDA plugin has been deprecated and a new one by David > > Morison will be released very soon. It has better controls for TMDA, > > and it is my hope that he will include controls that determine if a user > > has turned off TMDA for a particular account, although that remains to > > be seen. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 07:35:25 -0400 (EDT) > From: "C.B. Currier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SM-USERS] utlility app for importing text Addressbook > > I want to convert the addressbooks that I host that are used in VER 1.2.8 > to mysql. > > Did anyone develop a utility for this ? > > -- > C.B. Currier > > > > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 6 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: "Daniel Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 13:25:05 +0100 > Subject: [SM-USERS] Delete Attachments ONLY > > Hi guys - can you think of a way whereby users can delete attachments but > keep the email itself? This allows a greater flexibility in storage > management for users with limited quotas. > > Let me know if I'm missing something obvious - I did a quick search for > "delete attachment" but found nothing (am using OE newsgroups). > > SM 1.4.2 > Apache 8series > Linux > > Thanks! > Dan > > > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 7 > Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 13:59:26 +0100 > From: Graham Rimmington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SM-USERS] 553 and language > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > --------------040901030301060402010705 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I get this error when sending messages > > Requested action not taken: mailbox name not allowed > Server replied: 553 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Sender address rejected: not > logged in as owner > > I use squirrel mail on my own homepage no problem. But at this friends > homepage I get this error, both homepages are operated by the same same > web hotel supplier. (www.b-one.net). > > At first I thought it was something to do with the domain part of the > email address. So i set my email account up on his homepage but I get > the same error. > > Additionally languages will not change I've tried with sqm 1.42 and > 1.5 > > help please. > > --------------040901030301060402010705 > Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=utf8; > name="rimmo.vcf" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: attachment; > filename="rimmo.vcf" > > begin:vcard > fn:Graham Rimmington > n:Rimmington;Graham > email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > tel;work:+45 48295638 > tel;home:+45 48255533 > tel;cell:+45 61679963 > version:2.1 > end:vcard > > > --------------040901030301060402010705-- > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 8 > Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 05:51:19 -0700 (PDT) > Subject: Re: [SM-USERS] TMDA > From: "p dont think" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > What is the status of these tools? > > > > I saw that the TMDA plugin had been moved to obsolete & a reference is > > made to TMDA tools but cannot find them. > > > > I have TMDA working great on the incoming with qmail but outgoing I hav= > e > > not gotten working with SM & was hoping to find or develop some better > > functionality. So I am curious as to where the development is on this > > plugin. I also can assist in some of the debugging/development if > > possible. > > > > Is there a CVS for this, who do I contact? > > It's in very good shape, David told me he was shooting for release this > weekend (don't hold your breath, these things take time, especially when > we all do this for free). If you search the plugins mail archives, you > might be able to find a link to his development site; I don't have it on > hand at the moment. > > - Paul > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 9 > Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 14:04:04 +0100 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SM-USERS] TMDA > From: Bruce Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 04:52:47AM -0700, p dont think wrote: > > Yes, the two are fairly independent. There is a problem in that the > > outgoing addresses created by the tmda-sendmail wrapper may not be > > "reply-able", depending on your system setup. > > > > The current TMDA plugin has been deprecated and a new one by David Morison > > will be released very soon. It has better controls for TMDA, and it is my > > hope that he will include controls that determine if a user has turned off > > TMDA for a particular account, although that remains to be seen. > > Grah. I hate challenge/response systems: they are lazy and > inconsiderate, just shifting your own spam problem into other people's > mailboxes. The TMDA developers, like some others, justify it by saying > that their other techniques help limit the actualy number of challenges > sent out but this just shows the uselessness of C/R. If other > techniques can narrow down the "undecided" messages to just a few, you > should review them yourself. If they can't, then TMDA will just help > you become another idiot spammer. > > Quite a few mail admins of my acquaintance blacklist people who use C/R > systems. If I see much more crap from such systems, I'll probably start > doing the same. > > -- > Bruce > > Remember you're a Womble. > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 10 > Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 08:13:10 -0500 (EST) > Subject: Re: [SM-USERS] Re: ERROR : Connection dropped by imap-server. > From: "Chris Hilts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > One thing that puzzles med is the message is the syslog "Apr 5 23:57:5= > 3 > > old- > > geezer imapd-ssl: couriertls: accept: error:140760FC:SSL > > routines:SSL23_GET_CLIENT_HELLO:unknown protocol" > > The reason being is that SSL23 I believe the ssh port 23; so are courie= > r > > and squirrelmail having a disagreement as to which port should be > > TCP port 23 is telnet. 22 is ssh. The 23 in "SSL23" is probably a > version number. > > The next step is to be sure you've got Courier listening to port 993 as a > dedicated TLS port. Ie. All connections to 993 are assumed to be TLS; > clients do not need to issue a STARTTLS command. This is critical; > SquirrelMail does not and can not support STARTTLS. > > > telnet your.imap.server.or.localhost 993 > Trying 127.0.0.1... > Connected to 127.0.0.1. > Escape character is '^]'. > * OK yourhost.com Cyrus IMAP4 v2.1.15-IPv6-Debian-2.1.15-10 server ready > > If you get something like the above - you don't have Courier set up the > way you need it to be. Sorry. In fact, you shouldn't get much of > anything after the Connected to.. and Escape character lines. > > > --=20 > Chris Hilts > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 11 > Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 15:53:26 +0200 (CEST) > Subject: Re: [SM-USERS] Delete Attachments ONLY > From: "Marc Groot Koerkamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Daniel Watts said: > > Hi guys - can you think of a way whereby users can delete attachments b= > ut > > keep the email itself? This allows a greater flexibility in storage > > management for users with limited quotas. > > > > Currently that is not possible. The only way to remove attachments from a > mail is reconstructing a new mail without the attchments and append the > new mail to the specific mailbox and delete the old mail with the > attachments. That's how the imap protocol works. > > Maybe in the future, when I have time I might implement something like > that ;) > > Regards, > > Marc Groot Koerkamp. > > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 12 > Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 17:18:03 +0300 (EEST) > Subject: Re: [SM-USERS] 553 and language > From: "Tomas Kuliavas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Additionally languages will not change I've tried with sqm 1.42 and > > 1.5 > > http://www.squirrelmail.org/wiki/en_US/SupportingMultipleLanguages > > What OS? > > Does php has gettext support? > > Are you running php in safe mode? > > Have you installed locale packages for 1.5.0? > There is a link to them at http://www.squirrelmail.org/download.php > > -- > Tomas > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 13 > Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 07:45:09 -0700 (PDT) > Subject: Re: [SM-USERS] Squirrelmail as the only MUA > From: "Avery Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > <quote who="Tomas Kuliavas"> > >> The company I work for has been running exchange 5.5. We have had > >> corrupt > >> databases multiple times with this exchange server. It has been decided > >> that this exchange server needs to be replaced. I have setup a > >> postfix+procmail+dovcot-imap+spamassassin+squirrelmail server and have > >> migrated some of our major exchange server users mailboxes over to this > >> server for testing purposes. My bosses like squirrelmail allot. My next > >> step is to let the users test it out. We are looking at going completely > >> webmail based for the MUA in our company using squirrelmail. We have > >> around 35 users and only 6 gigs of email. My guess is we send and > >> receive > >> as a whole on average about 300 emails a day total. > >> > >> Does anyone think going completely webmail based using squirrelmail for > >> the MUA is a bad idea? Does anyone have any thoughts on this at all? Is > >> there anyone in this mailing list that has done this before? If so I > >> would > >> love to hear about how it has worked out. > >> > >> > >> I will be running this server on a PE2650, raid 5, single xeon 2.4Ghz, > >> with 1 gig of ram. I think this server can handle what I need it for > >> easy > >> enough. Does anyone see this differently? > > > > Advice No.1. Use Cyrus IMAP or any other setup that uses Maildirs. > > http://www.courier-mta.org/mbox-vs-maildir/ > > > > You have machine that might have some space CPU cycles, but that is not > > the excuse to waste those cycles in unoptimized webmail setup. > > > > I think dovencot-IMAP uses default unix mail spool and stores emails in > > mbox format. mbox has lower bottlenecks than maildir. > > > > No 2. http://www.squirrelmail.org/wiki/en_US/SquirrelMailPerformance > > > > No 3. http://www.squirrelmail.org/wiki/en_US/WindowsMailto > > > > No 4. RAID1 or any serious backup solution. If your raid array breaks, you > > will lose all your mail. > > > > -- > > Tomas > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials > > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of > > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system > > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click > > -- > > squirrelmail-users mailing list > > List Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > List Archives: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=2995 > > List Info: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-users > > > > > > Dovecot can use both mbox and maildir. I have it setup to use maildir. > Dovecot claims to be the fastest and most secure. But I think anyone who > is claiming to be the most secure is asking for trouble myself. It claims > to use less memory than all of the other imap servers out there. It can > user either virtual users or system users. I have it setup for now to use > system users I can't justify spending 8 hours learning how to setup > virtual users on a mail server this small. It is alot faster than uw-imap > that is for sure. > > I have looked at both cyrus and courier. The complete blackbox setup that > cyrus can do seems to be its major selling point. Courier I really liked > the looks of and just might use inplace of dovecot unless I can find out > if people are using dovecot in production environments. > > One of the last things I need to work on is the backup solution. I have > not decided one way or the other how I am going to tackle this problem. I > will be using tape backup for sure, but I am not sure if just using dump > alone is enough. > > Thanks for the feedback. > -- > Avery > > > > --__--__-- > > -- > squirrelmail-users mailing list > List Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > List Info: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-users > http://squirrelmail.org/cvs > > End of squirrelmail-users Digest > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click -- squirrelmail-users mailing list List Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List Archives: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=2995 List Info: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-users
