Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Stephan Bosch step...@rename-it.nl writes:
It is related to that change, yes. I fixed the problem, but I am still
not entirely happy with the error handling of the store action.
It would be best, I think, if the system failed safe (i.e. if it did not
lose the user's
I'm experimenting with a 2.0 setup, using the sieve plugin for 2.0 from
mercurial.
Without sieve, everything seems to work fine. Once I put in a
.dovecot.sieve file, though, nothing gets delivered, with the only hint
of what's going wrong being this mess in syslog:
Jul 7 13:18:00 bellman
On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 13:23 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Jul 7 13:18:00 bellman dovecot: lda(perry): Panic: file index-transaction.c:
line 70 (index_transaction_init): assertion failed: (box-opened)
Jul 7 13:18:00 bellman dovecot: lda(perry): Error: Raw backtrace:
On 2010-07-07 3:33 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 13:23 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Jul 7 13:18:00 bellman dovecot: lda(perry): Panic: file
index-transaction.c: line 70 (index_transaction_init): assertion failed:
(box-opened)
Jul 7 13:18:00 bellman dovecot: lda(perry):
Timo Sirainen t...@iki.fi writes:
On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 13:23 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Jul 7 13:18:00 bellman dovecot: lda(perry): Panic: file
index-transaction.c: line 70 (index_transaction_init): assertion failed:
(box-opened)
Jul 7 13:18:00 bellman dovecot: lda(perry): Error:
Perry E. Metzger wrote:
I'm experimenting with a 2.0 setup, using the sieve plugin for 2.0 from
mercurial.
Without sieve, everything seems to work fine. Once I put in a
.dovecot.sieve file, though, nothing gets delivered, with the only hint
of what's going wrong being this mess in syslog:
Jul
Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 13:23 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Jul 7 13:18:00 bellman dovecot: lda(perry): Panic: file index-transaction.c: line
70 (index_transaction_init): assertion failed: (box-opened)
Jul 7 13:18:00 bellman dovecot: lda(perry): Error: Raw backtrace:
Stephan Bosch step...@rename-it.nl writes:
It is related to that change, yes. I fixed the problem, but I am still
not entirely happy with the error handling of the store action.
It would be best, I think, if the system failed safe (i.e. if it did not
lose the user's mail in case of error, but
