similar to: Use multiple mbox locations

I've read the web/man pages on dsync, but it's not clear to me whether dsync can be used to export (rather than import) a user's mailbox to a remote non-dovecot IMAP account. (The intention is to use it whenever a user leaves and wants to copy their local mail to Google or whatever. I currently use uw-imapd's mailutil -- it works, but it's dreadfully slow.) As a first crack

I would also check where the "... is not portable!" messaage is generated. If it's done by the configure script, you can look at the test to give you a hint as to why this message was generated. For my setup, I did much the same as you but didn't have to set the SSL_CFLAGS, SSL_LIBS environment variables, nor did I set the --with-ssldir configure option (although your setup may

aside from cat? On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 03:07:58PM -0800, Joseph Tam wrote: > On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, Marc Roos wrote: > > >When concatenating mbox files like described here > >https://xaizek.github.io/2013-03-30/merge-mbox-mailboxes/. You will end > >up with an 'unsorted' mbox file. Is this going to be a problem > >esspecially when they are large >2GB's

St?phane Cottin writes: > A typical .qmail file : > > | /usr/bin/dspam --client --deliver=stdout --user "$EXT@$USER" | /usr/bin/preline -f /usr/lib/dovecot/dovecot-lda -d "$EXT@$USER" -a "$EXT@$USER" -m "$EXT2" > > When dspam segfault or is killed, preline receive an empty content and > only pass to dovecot-lda two headers ( Return-Path

On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, Marc Roos wrote: > When concatenating mbox files like described here > https://xaizek.github.io/2013-03-30/merge-mbox-mailboxes/. You will end > up with an 'unsorted' mbox file. Is this going to be a problem > esspecially when they are large >2GB's and new emails will be written to > it? I don't think it will be a problem, but you might have

Steffen Kaiser <skdovecot at inf.h-brs.de> wrote: >> I'd like to configure my dovecot service to use the IMAP SPECIAL-USE > > well, in my experience SPECIAL-USE is just a suggestions to clients. Check > RFC 6154 for MUSTs, you'll find only few. Hence, how the client (or the > server) behaves in a special case is implementor-defined. In other words, expect the

Thank you for the response. So, both password files (master and regular user credentials) have the same contents in this scenario, correct? -Kishore On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 11:42 PM Joseph Tam <jtam.home at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, 3 Aug 2020, Kishore Potnuru wrote: > > > =============== > > Jul 28 11:14:23 auth: Fatal: Master passdb can't have pass=yes if there

Steffen Kaiser writes: > e.g. put message-id into mail_always_cache_fields > > - From http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot-cvs/2013-May/023261.html > > lib-storage: Allow mail_*cache_fields settings to specify any hdr.* fields ... but I belatedly wrote ... > Maybe you can even add these items into the cache upon delivery, > but someone more knowlegable than I would have to

> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 02:05:48 > From: Joseph Tam <jtam.home at gmail.com> > To: dovecot at dovecot.org > Subject: Re: fast doveadm search results > > Steffen Kaiser writes: > >> e.g. put message-id into mail_always_cache_fields >> >> - From http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot-cvs/2013-May/023261.html >> >> lib-storage: Allow

Is there a reason I should prefer LMTP over LDA for local delivery? Performance? Security? The Wiki doesn't differentiates LMTP vs LDA with respect to sendmail configuration, so am I correct that I just need to replace mail.local with dovecot-lda, which will choose LDA/LMTP based on dovecot.conf? Also, can I consolidate authentication by configuring dovecot to use what sendmail uses (Cyrus

Thanks Joseph, Aki, but something missing from upgrade document, where does the dh param file go? I located ssl-parameters.dat so I will put it there. Quoting Joseph Tam <jtam.home at gmail.com>: > On Fri, 22 Jun 2018, Joseph Tam wrote: > >> However, recent advances make this condition obsolete [*] and not >> really safer, so a much faster way to generate a DH key is

A summary of answers I got to the questiosn I posed. > Is there a reason I should prefer LMTP over LDA for local delivery? Thanks for the responses I received. The benefits reported were more/better information logging, and service isolation. Also, one significant advantage not mentioned for LMTP was that one delivery failure to multiple recipients can be disambiguated; LDA can only return

BehrensM <EDV2 at BehrensM.de> writes: > Beside the lokal mailserver-account(s) there is/are pulled Mails via > imap direct from the mailprovider, the "old" solution which shall be > replaced by the new mailserver. imap direct from provider shows the > mails/Attachments in corrects size an opening works. > Only using the local mailserver fails. > ... > Mar 26

Pali Roh?r <pali.rohar at gmail.com> writes: > Still I want read/write access to storage and want to use mbox as > storage (also for easier backup and copy)... Backup performance may be another big win for Maildir, especially for incremental backups. Be that as it may ... > And my question was how to properly read and write from/to mbox files > which are used by dovecot.

Nikolai Lusan <nikolai at lusan.id.au> writes: >> Just went through this one recently using CentOS with SendMail, Procmail >> and IMAP conversion from mbox to Maildir - I needed to make sure I could >> run both formats while I migrated users one-by-one. > > When I have migrated solutions from mbox to maildir (I have done more than > one) I found it easier to get a

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 11 Aug 2018, Aki Tuomi wrote: > While this is true, it can be useful to encrypt messages in-rest at 3rd party storage. > For end user, only PGP or similar provides sufficient security against admin. Nice, short, pinpointed words I will file away for upcoming discussions. And I will file M's response, too, for the management.

Nice to get to hear this. However, the password is not stored in clear text here. How then does it work? On Fri, Dec 21, 2018, 00:58 Joseph Tam <jtam.home at gmail.com wrote: > On Thu, 20 Dec 2018, Odhiambo Washington wrote: > > > At the expense of sounding stupid, could you please expound on the > > sequence? :) > > In a nutshell, during protocol handshake, the server

<!doctype html> <html> <head> <meta charset="UTF-8"> </head> <body> <div> <br> </div> <blockquote type="cite"> <div> On 07/08/2019 00:37 Joseph Tam via dovecot < <a href="mailto:dovecot@dovecot.org">dovecot@dovecot.org</a>> wrote: </div>

Matthew Broadhead <matthew.broadhead at nbmlaw.co.uk> wrote: >> does anyone know of a linux module (maybe similar to fail2ban) that >> could be installed which would monitor email logs (sign ins) and alert >> the user to any suspicious activity on their account? I just monitor straight from the logs using homebrew utilties. @lbutlr" <kremels at kreme.com>

On Fri, 13 Mar 2015, Cliff Hayes writes: >> By closing off other avenues other than dovecot imap/pop/lda/etc., >> the indices will stay sync'd. > > I use dovecot's lda and dovecot's sieve filter. Then I'm not sure how mailboxes ever get out of sync. > So it looks like I need to compare the index/mailbox mtimes as you suggest. > > What am I looking for?