Thanks... As for waiting 10 months, we didn't know it was around so we really were Not waiting and you know us bitchy sysadmins we want it and we want it Yesterday <LOL>
-John -----Original Message----- From: Brian Kolaci [mailto:bk@;Kola.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 4:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [vchkpw] Vpopmail and mysql limits > On Wednesday, October 23, 2002, at 03:28 PM, John Johnson wrote: > > > ok to use mysql-limits is there a convert program to convert the > > limits > > I have > > Or do I have to start over with them and reset them.. I guess I will > > also have > > To recompile vqadmin and qmailadmin for this as well? > > Qmailadmin and vqadmin do not support the new vlimits functions yet. > vqadmin has its own code to modify the limits file only (not sql). > Brian, the author of this patch, does have his own patches for > qmailadmin I think. So you really can't do anything with them until > you have code to use them. Not sure if Brian is planning to publish > his qmailadmin patch... > > Regards, > > Bill > I see there's been alot of traffic on this today. I've been out (working) most of the day and haven't been able to keep up. It should be easy to put together a utility to convert the limits, not an issue. As for several of the other comments, I'd like to take tonight to think about several of the suggestions and post one myself. I've been running with the current patched API since vpopmail 4.9.6 and its been working well. I also have a patched qmailadmin-1.0.4 with quotas (I forgot who wrote the quota patch), and a patched version of vdelivermail. Both of these use a recursive stat() to determine usage & quota since it was before the Maildir++ quotas were in there, so I always had *regular* disk usage quotas enforced which I believe may differ from the Maildir++ quotas. My intent was to get the API into the library before updating the programs/utilities to actually use the API. I've been sitting on this for about 10 months now (with a working system), and now finally got it into the distribution. Now it seems (from all the traffic on it today) that nobody can wait for it... I think it would be best to get the base correct and sound before actually using it in the utilities and programs. I have some pros/cons (and I'd like to extend the list and send it out to everyone) about the current implementation and want to get some feedback before moving on it. (Its waited 10 months already, another day or two won't hurt). I'll compile and post some questions in a bit to see what people really want/need and make sure this gets done properly. Thanks, Brian
