hi,
you should remove the last dovecot update immediately. http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/dovec...
here it is often reproducable, squirrelmail - dovecot
sometimes you can see a new "sentmail"-box delete it with squirrelmail, dovecot/squirrelmail has no acces to INBOX mail, mail-f, ... works ok downgrade to # rpm -q dovecot dovecot-0.99.11-1.FC3.4 FC3 cd#3 solve all the problems
bugzilla will follow
Em Sáb, 2005-01-15 às 14:40 +0100, shrek-m@gmx.de escreveu:
hi,
you should remove the last dovecot update immediately. http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/dovec...
Dovecot 1.00 from ATRpms is bad too. I lost one week of work because of it :-) I already asked for Axel to remove it, and didn't updated my system again since that.
On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 09:43 -0300, Alexandre Strube wrote:
Em Sáb, 2005-01-15 às 14:40 +0100, shrek-m@gmx.de escreveu:
hi,
you should remove the last dovecot update immediately. http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/dovec...
Dovecot 1.00 from ATRpms is bad too. I lost one week of work because of it :-) I already asked for Axel to remove it, and didn't updated my system again since that.
there is no final dovecot 1.00 from the upstream author. There are only test releases. Some of the test releases have had some serious bugs in them, this is why they're test releases.
-sv
On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 11:52:36AM -0500, seth vidal wrote:
On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 09:43 -0300, Alexandre Strube wrote:
Em Sáb, 2005-01-15 às 14:40 +0100, shrek-m@gmx.de escreveu:
you should remove the last dovecot update immediately. http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/dovec...
Dovecot 1.00 from ATRpms is bad too. I lost one week of work because of it :-) I already asked for Axel to remove it, and didn't updated my system again since that.
there is no final dovecot 1.00 from the upstream author. There are only test releases. Some of the test releases have had some serious bugs in them, this is why they're test releases.
Which is why they are in a repo called "bleeding" and labeled accordingly :)
Anyway to do justice to dovecot 1.0, it does seem rock stable in my test installation. But I've only been following 1.0-test for a few months, so it may have been bleeding, indeed :)
Em Dom, 2005-01-16 às 17:56 +0100, Axel Thimm escreveu:
On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 11:52:36AM -0500, seth vidal wrote:
On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 09:43 -0300, Alexandre Strube wrote:
Em Sáb, 2005-01-15 às 14:40 +0100, shrek-m@gmx.de escreveu:
you should remove the last dovecot update immediately. http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/dovec...
Dovecot 1.00 from ATRpms is bad too. I lost one week of work because of it :-) I already asked for Axel to remove it, and didn't updated my system again since that.
there is no final dovecot 1.00 from the upstream author. There are only test releases. Some of the test releases have had some serious bugs in them, this is why they're test releases.
Which is why they are in a repo called "bleeding" and labeled accordingly :)
That's what make our jobs fun after all :-)
Anyway to do justice to dovecot 1.0, it does seem rock stable in my test installation. But I've only been following 1.0-test for a few months, so it may have been bleeding, indeed :)
Did I reported some trouble to you those days, didn't I? Something regarding dovecot 1.0-test with squirrelmail...
Em Dom, 2005-01-16 às 11:52 -0500, seth vidal escreveu:
you should remove the last dovecot update immediately. http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/dovec...
Dovecot 1.00 from ATRpms is bad too. I lost one week of work because of it :-) I already asked for Axel to remove it, and didn't updated my system again since that.
there is no final dovecot 1.00 from the upstream author. There are only test releases. Some of the test releases have had some serious bugs in them, this is why they're test releases.
Sorry, you are correct. It was 1.0test28 (or something like that) which caused havoc here.
Em Sáb, 2005-01-15 às 14:40 +0100, shrek-m@gmx.de escreveu:
hi,
you should remove the last dovecot update immediately. http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/dovec...
Do not remove dovecot.... change /etc/dovecot.config to include mail_extra_groups=mail
(#mail_extra_groups= is already in the config file, remove the # and add the mail group name)
On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 19:11, Don Russell wrote:
Em Sáb, 2005-01-15 às 14:40 +0100, shrek-m@gmx.de escreveu:
hi,
you should remove the last dovecot update immediately. http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/3/i386/dovec...
Do not remove dovecot.... change /etc/dovecot.config to include mail_extra_groups=mail
(#mail_extra_groups= is already in the config file, remove the # and add the mail group name)
There are several solutions to this problem:
1) explicitly set "mbox_locks = fcntl"
The default is "fcntl dotlock", by forcing mbox_locks to fcntl only then dotlocks won't be created in addition to fcntl locking.
2) If you want to use dotlocks then the above suggestion applies, set mail_extra_groups to mail in the in the config file. This is documented in /usr/share/doc/dovecot-*/REDHAT-FAQ.txt
The use of dotlocks is probably only needed on older NFS mounts. The permission problem with dotlock creation only occurs if the mbox file in the system spool directory, which is only one of multiple places to locate the mbox (albeit common).
3) Wait a short while, a new rpm is being prepared whose config file reverts to the previous behavior of forcing mbox_locks to fcntl which overrides the default.
John Dennis wrote:
- Wait a short while, a new rpm is being prepared whose config file
reverts to the previous behavior of forcing mbox_locks to fcntl which overrides the default.
thanks.
can you post it in the fedora-announce-list when they are in updates-testing / updates ?