similar to: dovecot creating literal %d/%n/ folders

dovecot -n # 2.0.15: /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf # OS: Linux 2.6.38.8-32.fc15.i686.PAE i686 Fedora release 15 (Lovelock) auth_debug_passwords = yes disable_plaintext_auth = no info_log_path = /var/log/dovecot-info.log log_path = /var/log/dovecot.log mail_access_groups = mail mail_location = mbox:~/mail:INBOX=/var/spool/mail/%u mail_privileged_group = mail mbox_write_locks = fcntl passdb { args =

Hi Bill, this proposal seems strangely complicated. I don't see the advantage of the dispatch instruction over just attaching the information to each invoke. Right now you have invoke void @_Z3foov() to label %invcont unwind label %catch.handlers catch.handlers: landingpad dispatch resume to label %... catches [ %struct.__fundamental_type_info_pseudo* @_ZTIi, label

Hi Perhaps I've been going too far OT in my previous thread or perhaps I just didn't explain my problem clear enough so forgive me for trying again. I have configured fetchmail to fetch my mail from my ISP's POP3-server. I have set up procmail to filter messages and deliver all non-filtered messages to the folder ".IN-catchall/" in "$HOME/Maildir" After sending

Hey guys, I've got another C7 problem I was hoping to solve. I installed appdynamics-php-agent-4.0.5.0-1.x86_64 on a C7.1 host. It's failing to communicate with it's controller on another host. And this is the interesting part. Whether or not I have SELinux enabled, I have apache reporting SELinux problems. [root at web1:~] #getenforce Permissive May 10 20:47:56 web1 python[25735]:

Hello All, Looking for a little guidance on Real Time Pattern Matching. We are attempting to block outbound 411 via when someone dials NXX-555-XXXX, The must common being NXX-555-1212. However, We have some outbound providers that consider any call to NXX-555-XXXX a directory assistance call. So simply making my pattern _NXX5551212 doesn't work. So as you can see from the lines

This is a revision of the second exception handling proposal I sent out. You can see it here: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2010-November/036484.html After much discussion, there are some changes to the proposal – some significant and some minor. One major point, this proposal does not address the issue of catching an exception thrown from a non-invoke instruction. However if done

Hi all, I'm enjoying using dovecot deliver with qmail+vpopmail+dspam. It works mostly fine, I like the indexing and sieve features with dovecot deliver. I would like to get more details on trouble, the log entry is just : " 2009-11-18_20:38:55.64778 delivery 50833: deferral: " As you see, there no reason for the deferral. How can I make deliver more verbose ? I also have a

Hi all, I'm trying to sort out my dial plan. What I'm wanting is something like the following - a bit simplified but hopefully you'll get the idea. 1) match internal extensions: dial them 2) anything else: send out zap 1 is easy :) it's 2 that's giving me problems. I had hoped that the 'i' extension would act as a catchall extension but it seems to only do that from

On Dec 1, 2010, at 10:20 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Bill, this proposal seems strangely complicated. I don't see the advantage > of the dispatch instruction over just attaching the information to each invoke. > Right now you have > > invoke void @_Z3foov() > to label %invcont unwind label %catch.handlers > > catch.handlers: landingpad > dispatch resume

I remember back in the dialup era there was a small company in Timisoara who tried to sell this kind of solution. (They started to sell servers after a while so I guess they didn't have much success selling? their workaround) So I guess it is not trivial to sort again all the mails and deliver each one in a mailbox after you mixed all together in a single catchall mailbox. Could be done

Hi everyone! I've been silently working on the previous exception handling proposal I published last year (http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2009-November/027311.html). However, there were some major deficiencies in it. After discussing this further with Jim Grosbach and John McCall, we've come up with another proposal. As you can see, it incorporates the idea of

I have a Cyrus installation with postfix and openXchange. I get the mails from catchall account with procmail and distribute with the mail server. Now I have a new site office where couples of staff members are going to be relocated. Since we have only an ADSL line on site office if there any way I could forward the mails for these staff members to another Mail Server with dynamic IP address?

Hi, As I migrate to sieve, I would like to carry over the logic I had in procmail rules, which let me take all mail where I'd never sent email to that address into a final spam catchall, which I called "neversent." I see that sieve can't run external programs, and I wonder if that means I'm SOL, or is there an alternate approach that does roughly the same thing? (I

Hello, I have a quite unusual encoding problem (?). I call rsync with the following parameters: /usr/bin/rsync -a --delete --numeric-ids --delete-excluded \ --rsh="/usr/bin/ssh -o StrictHostKeyChecking=no -i \ /etc/rsnapshot_ssh_certs/mykey" \ --link-dest=/data/snapshots/hourly.1/folder/mail/ \ rsyncbackup at server:/var/backups/mail/. \

Hi Friends I am configuring a mailserver , basically the working of this server is to fetchmail from remote server and we have one account that is catchall account and we are using procmail to distribute all mails properly to users, n i m building new server for my company but i m getting following error if i am sending mails from outside , if i am sending mail from my own domain then there is

Greetings, Running CVS HEAD about 3 weeks old, I have been beating my head trying to get this to work properly.. Or at least figure out what's going on. Maybe I have done things wrong... I have created a 'catch all' extension at the end of our last context where all phones & voicemail extension exist. This catch all is included in all and works quite nicely except when voicemail

Hi everyone, I''m new to rails and also to rspec, but I tried to do my homework. To answer my questions, I searched this list''s archives, the Rails API, and Google, to no avail. Therefor, I''d be grateful if someone could point me in the right directions: 1) There doesn''t seem to be a counterpart to assert_recognizes in rspec. route_for() won''t work

Hi again, It works :-) Reclocking, however, is another kettle of fish. Trying #echo 0f > /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/pstate hangs X. Trying the same with no X running reveals: Dec 7 10:08:42 dell-smo kernel: [ 728.831020] nouveau 0000:08:00.0: clk: unable to find matching pll values a number of time as then soft lockup. Very much akin to

Hi, With drm-next from http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/drm-next/2016-12-08/ I don't get the error messages, but I still get a soft cpu lockup. What info would you need from me to get it working? Best regards, Sune Mølgaard On 2016-12-08 08:10, Karol Herbst wrote: > hi, > > give the drm-next kernel tree a try. Sadly the reclocking improvements didn't land with

Aha! That seems to do it. If I interpret correctly, it doesn't set it quite to full power, though, but it's certainly an improvement: 07: core 405 MHz memory 810 MHz 0a: core 270-1124 MHz memory 1600 MHz 0f: core 270-1124 MHz memory 2002 MHz AC DC * AC: core 1012 MHz memory 2002 MHz A short run of glmark2 shows aver 100% improvement to ~550 FPS. Interestingly, it's still nowhere