Displaying 10 results from an estimated 10 matches for "ehmm".
Did you mean:
ehm
2015 May 21
2
Dovecot-Director, (Manage)-Sieve und Remote-IP
Hello,
I`ve got a question about Dovecot-Director and (Manage)-Sieve: is there
any possibility to pass-through the original IP-address to the backend
server?
In this case I try to pass-through the IP-address of a webmail server.
I`ve looked for a solution in different forums and tried it with the
parameter "login_trusted_networks", however no success.
The above solution is working
2015 May 21
0
Dovecot-Director, (Manage)-Sieve und Remote-IP
..."login_trusted_networks", however no success.
>
> The above solution is working with IMAP/POP3/LMTP, but not with Sieve.
>
> For any solutions or any hint I would be grateful.
Well... ManageSieve doesn't support an XCLIENT or equivalent command at
the moment, because... ehmm... probably nobody ever asked for it.
Given the example in the pop3 service, it should be rather trivial to
implement in ManageSieve. I will look at that later this week.
Regards,
Stephan.
2004 Jul 08
0
[LLVMdev] PHI nodes in machine code
On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 08:06:29PM +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Could anybody quickly explain why PHI nodes instructions are necessary
> in machine code? And why the code in LiveVariables.cpp which looks at
> those PHI nodes (line 249 and below) is necessary.
LLVM Machine code is in SSA.
Let's say you want to do
r = a cond b
But doing this:
if (a cond b) then
r = 1
2004 Jul 09
2
[LLVMdev] PHI nodes in machine code
...ond.
> > but this means that operand0 and operand1 (the successor basic blocks)
> > suddenly get more predecessor than recorded in phi nodes, and
> > LiveVariables.cpp asserts on that.
>
> Naturally, as PHI nodes need to have as many entries as there are
> predecessors.
Ehmm... this means the 'SelectPHINodes' function I've copy-pasted from X86
backend needs more work... gotta do that now.
- Volodya
2005 Feb 04
2
Failures they e2fsck doesn't find
Hi,
I've run many time e2fsck, but in a special dir ls tells me:
ls: r?cksendung-wlan.dvi: No such file or directory
ls: baf?g_r?ckmeldung.latex: No such file or directory
ls: finpr?f.pdf: No such file or directory
$ cat finpr?f.pdf
cat: finpr?f.pdf: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden
I don't know what to do? How can I find the failure? If I cat the files
with debugfs, I see the
2014 Aug 04
1
dovecot-lda 2.2.13 crashing when sieve_before used
Hi together!
We use dovecot under Debian wheezy amd64, using the repository ...
deb http://xi.rename-it.nl/debian/ stable-auto/dovecot-2.2 main
Yesterday's routine upgrade to version 2:2.2.13-1~auto+130 (or some
other upgrade that came along from Debian?) introduced a problem with
mail delivery, which I was able to track down to a crash of dovecot-lda.
Whenever I do something like ...
2004 Jul 08
4
[LLVMdev] PHI nodes in machine code
Could anybody quickly explain why PHI nodes instructions are necessary in
machine code? And why the code in LiveVariables.cpp which looks at those PHI
nodes (line 249 and below) is necessary.
The reason I'm asking is that I try to support 64-bit comparison and I do it
by generating code like:
// if high1 cond high2: goto operand0
// if high1 reverse_cond high2:
2003 Jul 23
3
cvs pserver sig11 on 4.8-R
Hi all,
We recently moved our CVS repository from a 4.6-STABLE machine to a brand
new 4.8 install, on another identical machine. The server runs cvs in
'pserver' mode, for remote access by various Windows/Solaris/Linux/FreeBSD
clients.
We pretty soon noticed that the cvs server process was occasionally crashing
on sig11 (ie. a segfault). The only evidence for this was in the message
2018 Aug 09
3
imapsieve wrong matches on APPEND cause
Hello,
I'm experiencing some strange problem with imapsieve mailbox rules matching.
I have Ubuntu Server 18.04.1 LTS with Postfix 3.3.0, Dovecot 2.2.33.2 and
Rspamd 1.7.9.
The problem occurs with Microsoft Outlook 2016 mail client.
When moving with Outlook, APPEND event is logged instead of MOVE.
However, when moving with another client, MOVE event is logged.
So without APPEND event in
2007 Mar 22
13
migration/acl4 problem
Hi,
S10U3: It seems, that ufs POSIX-ACLs are not properly translated to zfs
ACL4 entries, when one xfers a directory tree from UFS to ZFS.
Test case:
Assuming one has an user A and B, both belonging to group G and having
their
umask set to 022:
1) On UFS
- as user A do:
mkdir /dir
chmod 0775 /dir
setfacl -m d:u::rwx,d:g::rwx,d:o:r-x,d:m:rwx /dir
# samba would