[Dovecot] LIST % not returning correct data?

[J . Wendland]

Hi list,
I have

namespace private {
  prefix = INBOX.
  separator = .
  inbox = yes
}

in an installation migrated from courier. I am testing with Outlook
Mobile 5 (OM) which uses 'LIST  %' to get the folder list. Now
courier used to return

 * LIST (\HasChildren) . INBOX

whereas dovecot returns

 * LIST (\HasNoChildren) . INBOX

which is why OM failes to display any folder. Is this dovecot's failure
or am I missing something here?

Thanks,
  Jörg

-- 
Sicherheit - Verfügbarkeit - Kontinuität
-
IT-Service-Management von

ScanPlus GmbH Tel. +49 731 92013 150
Lise-Meitner-Straße 5, D-89081 Ulm, Germany   Fax. +49 731 92013 29 150
Web: http://www.scan-plus.de/ Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-

Re: [Dovecot] LIST % not returning correct data?

[J . Wendland]

Hi,

 Maybe experiment with that? Try just 'INBOX' without the period?

This has the only effect of leaving the period out between
INBOX and folder names, ie. INBOXTrash. And no, the bahaviour
of the LIST command does not change.

Thanks,
  Jörg

[Dovecot] dovecot vs. Outlook Mobile

[J . Wendland]

Hi,
I am testing dovecot with Outlook Mobile 5 (OM5), which is currently
not working. OM5 connects, says NOOP and CAPABILITY, does login
correctly and simply loggs out after that telling the user that it
could not download any messages. When I put an imapproxy[0] in front
of dovecot, OM5 works perfectly well. That leads me to the thought,
that something in the way dovecot sends its responses makes OM5
upset. Does anybody on this have seen this before?

Thanks,
  Jörg

[0] http://www.imapproxy.org

-- 
Sicherheit - Verfügbarkeit - Kontinuität
-
IT-Service-Management von

ScanPlus GmbH Tel. +49 731 92013 150
Lise-Meitner-Straße 5, D-89081 Ulm, Germany   Fax. +49 731 92013 29 150
Web: http://www.scan-plus.de/ Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-

Re: [Dovecot] Replication plans

[J . Wendland]

Hi list,

 OpenLDAP uses another strategy, which is more robust aka needs less 
 fragile interaction between the servers.

We have been thinking very long about replication. The requirement
is to have a backup computing center in distant location, so
replication has to work over a WAN connection (latency!) and must
be able to recover from failures. This in mind we came to the
conclusion that the strategy OpenLDAP is using would be the best
to come up with and would be not too difficult to implement (we
even started experiments which showed that this would be feasible).
BTW, Oracle's replication mechanism (DataGuard) also works in a
similar way, ie. by transferring the transaction logs to the backup
and replaying them there.

Cheers,
  Jörg

Re: [Dovecot] index-related crash in dovecot 1.0.0

[J . Wendland]

Hi Timo,

Timo Sirainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 16.05.2007 15:58:06:
 On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 13:44 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  dovecot: 2007-05-16 13:30:09 Error: IMAP(6126360): file 
  index-mail-headers.c: 
line 260 (index_mail_parse_header): assertion failed: (part != NULL)
 
 I'm still not sure how you managed to cause this, but I think this will
 fix it: http://dovecot.org/list/dovecot-cvs/2007-May/008821.html

This patch fixes the issue. Thank you for your support.

Jörg

-- 
Sicherheit - Verfügbarkeit - Kontinuität
-
IT-Service-Management von

ScanPlus GmbH Tel. +49 731 92013 150
Lise-Meitner-Straße 5, D-89081 Ulm, Germany   Fax. +49 731 92013 29 150
Web: http://www.scan-plus.de/ Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-

Re: [Dovecot] index-related crash in dovecot 1.0.0

[J . Wendland]

Hi,
more info:

Timo Sirainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb am 16.05.2007 15:58:06:
 On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 13:44 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  dovecot: 2007-05-16 13:30:09 Error: IMAP(6126360): file 
  index-mail-headers.c: 
line 260 (index_mail_parse_header): assertion failed: (part != NULL)
 
 I'm still not sure how you managed to cause this, but I think this will
 fix it: http://dovecot.org/list/dovecot-cvs/2007-May/008821.html

I'll try this patch. The mailbox was used with rc15 with which the
crash appeared. I then upgraded to 1.0.0 hoping that this version
would not crash anymore but the error persisted. So it may be that
rc15 did something wrong to the index files that causes the crash.

Jörg

-- 
Sicherheit - Verfügbarkeit - Kontinuität
-
IT-Service-Management von

ScanPlus GmbH Tel. +49 731 92013 150
Lise-Meitner-Straße 5, D-89081 Ulm, Germany   Fax. +49 731 92013 29 150
Web: http://www.scan-plus.de/ Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-