Dear All, Thanks for all your replied but still I don't know how to install from 1.0.7 to 1.2.14. What should I consider to keep the same configuration during or after upgrade?
It is the first time I am trying to upgrade my Dovecot. Thank a lot for your help --- On Fri, 1/10/10, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: dovecot Digest, Vol 90, Issue 3 To: [email protected] Date: Friday, 1 October, 2010, 15:25 Send dovecot mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://dovecot.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dovecot or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of dovecot digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Dovecot v0.99.13-3 upgrade to 1.0.15-2 ?? (Noel Butler) 2. Re: how to upgrade dovecot (Noel Butler) 3. Re: Dovecot v0.99.13-3 upgrade to 1.0.15-2 ?? (Jerry) 4. Re: Dovecot v0.99.13-3 upgrade to 1.0.15-2 ?? (Jerry) 5. Re: how to upgrade dovecot (fakessh) 6. Re: Dovecot v0.99.13-3 upgrade to 1.0.15-2 ?? (Stan Hoeppner) 7. v1 ok, v2 not (Alberto) 8. Re: Possible bug with proxy in 2.0.4 (Ed W) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 22:37:25 +1000 From: Noel Butler <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot v0.99.13-3 upgrade to 1.0.15-2 ?? To: [email protected] Message-ID: <1285936645.21841.19.ca...@tardis> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 14:20 +0200, Jakob Curdes wrote: > All true, but there is a current 1.2.14 out there which should probably > be preferred ove a two-and-a-half year old 1.0.15. > Jakob > Indeed, but some people who use certain distros are scared shitless of using source packages and will insist on using a several yo version because thats all <insert distro X or Y here> provides, the 1.2 branch is rock solid stable and time proven, if distro X/Y only oifferes 1.0.x, well, that says a lot about distro X/Y, we all know who X 'n Y are, without mentioning names :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: face-smile.png Type: image/png Size: 873 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20101001/d1d05ea2/attachment-0001.png ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 22:40:41 +1000 From: Noel Butler <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Dovecot] how to upgrade dovecot To: [email protected] Message-ID: <1285936841.21841.23.ca...@tardis> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 13:32 +0100, arif khwaja wrote: > Dear All, > I have Centos 5 and devecot 1.0.7 I want to upgrade it to the latest version. > I will appreciate if any one can tell me how can I upgrade it please. > > use the source, luke :) from the website I suggest using 1.2.14, expect a couple teething problems depending on your setup for the 1.0 to 1.2 changes in the config, but as to how you need it built, depends on how you are using it now. . -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: face-smile.png Type: image/png Size: 873 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20101001/19bf35d4/attachment-0001.png ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 08:53:58 -0400 From: Jerry <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot v0.99.13-3 upgrade to 1.0.15-2 ?? To: [email protected] Message-ID: <20101001085358.6c8c3...@scorpio> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 22:32:39 +1000 Noel Butler <[email protected]> articulated: > really? wow how things must have changed in recent years, they used to > be so, well, debian like, but not quite as bad :) Touch?. The FreeBSD developers do have a bug up their ass regarding GPL licenses which has effectively slowed down the introduction of some new (better) software into the base system. This has reportedly led to sporadic problems with some newer applications being released into the FreeBSD ports system. All things considered though, they usually maintain software that is relatively up-to-date; i.e., Postfix for example. The developers version is always available and current in the ports system. Most other major applications follow that general protocol. New releases of Dovecot are always available, usually only a few days after being released. This 2.x version is not the norm though. It is, as you so clearly stated, a BETA version. I would like to see FreeBSED release it clearly marked as a BETA or DEVELOPERS version, aka "USE AT ON RISK". Doing so would allow it to receive more extensive testing while warning potential users of the risks involved. I would comment on Debian; however, I don't want to start a flame war. -- Jerry ? [email protected] Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 08:59:03 -0400 From: Jerry <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot v0.99.13-3 upgrade to 1.0.15-2 ?? To: [email protected] Message-ID: <20101001085903.71a54...@scorpio> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 22:37:25 +1000 Noel Butler <[email protected]> articulated: > Indeed, but some people who use certain distros are scared shitless of > using source packages and will insist on using a several yo version > because thats all <insert distro X or Y here> provides, the 1.2 > branch is rock solid stable and time proven, if distro X/Y only > oifferes 1.0.x, well, that says a lot about distro X/Y, we all know > who X 'n Y are, without mentioning names :) Seriously, the weekend is upon use. Nothing like a good flame war over whose OS is superior. -- Jerry ? [email protected] Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 15:11:02 +0200 From: fakessh <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Dovecot] how to upgrade dovecot To: Dovecot Mailing List <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Le vendredi 1 octobre 2010 14:40, Noel Butler a ?crit?: > On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 13:32 +0100, arif khwaja wrote: > > Dear All, > > I have Centos 5 and devecot 1.0.7 I want to upgrade it to the latest > > version. I will appreciate if any one can tell me how can I upgrade it > > please. > > use the source, luke :) from the website > > I suggest using 1.2.14, expect a couple teething problems depending on your > setup for the 1.0 to 1.2 changes in the config, but as to how you need it > built, depends on how you are using it now. > > . I describe the procedure for migrating from 1.2.13 to 2.0.0 on my blog i quote dovecot -n for 1.2.11 and i quote dovecot -n for 2.0.0 http://fakessh.eu/?p=150 http://fakessh.eu/ sign my blog if you desire -- http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x092164A7 gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-key 092164A7 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20101001/8ab7ec2c/attachment-0001.bin ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 08:35:54 -0500 From: Stan Hoeppner <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot v0.99.13-3 upgrade to 1.0.15-2 ?? To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Jerry put forth on 10/1/2010 7:59 AM: > On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 22:37:25 +1000 > Noel Butler <[email protected]> articulated: > >> Indeed, but some people who use certain distros are scared shitless of >> using source packages and will insist on using a several yo version >> because thats all <insert distro X or Y here> provides, the 1.2 >> branch is rock solid stable and time proven, if distro X/Y only >> oifferes 1.0.x, well, that says a lot about distro X/Y, we all know >> who X 'n Y are, without mentioning names :) > > Seriously, the weekend is upon use. Nothing like a good flame war over > whose OS is superior. I've never understood the OS flame war mentality. Each OS has its strengths and its weaknesses. You pick your OS poison based on the strengths you desire, and live with the warts. Every OS has warts, some more than others, but they all have 'em. -- Stan ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 16:09:35 +0200 From: Alberto <[email protected]> Subject: [Dovecot] v1 ok, v2 not To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" hello everybody! This's my very first post in dovecot. I'm installing a new server for backup site, with qmail + vpopmail 5.4.32 + dovecot. Production server, more or less outdated, runs with Couier Imap, but everybody know the history.. I've been fighting for several days...And no luck with version 2.0.4, 2.0.3 neither. My first asumption was to review things thousand of times due to newbie condition... This morning I've tried version 1.2.14 and voila! , it works perfectly! The error log with version 2 was the famous unkown user one: dovecot: auth: vpopmail([email protected],10.206.16.10): unknown user test4 user worked perfectly with pop3... Just FYI, is this can help. Regards! ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 15:25:22 +0100 From: Ed W <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Dovecot] Possible bug with proxy in 2.0.4 To: Timo Sirainen <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed On 30/09/2010 18:48, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 08:08 +0100, Ed W wrote: >>> CRAM-MD5 doesn't work directly with proxying. It can't work, by CRAM-MD5 >>> design. The only way to make it work is if your passdb lookup returns a >>> password, either the user's actual password in plaintext or some master >>> password, that the backends accepts with plaintext authentication. >> I'm not quite sure I understand the nuances of that? >> >> Yes I do have a passdb (on the remote machine) which returns a plain >> password. Actually since it's DB driven I have already returned all the >> information needed to auth the user on the proxying machine >> >> The password query is the same on both sides and it looks like: >> >> password_query = SELECT NULLIF(mail_host, '%l') as proxy, >> NULLIF(mail_host, '%l') as host, \ >> email as user, password, \ > Add: ..., password, password as pass, .. > > Aha - this is the master login stuff. That does kind of make sense. Quite subtle mind Thanks for replying Ed W ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ dovecot mailing list [email protected] http://dovecot.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dovecot End of dovecot Digest, Vol 90, Issue 3 **************************************
