).
Begin forwarded message:
From: Ian G Batten [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu 25 Oct 07 12:30:57 BDT
To: Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Cyrus Mailing List info-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Cyrus IMAPd 2.3.10 Released
I've just compiled 2.3.10 on batten.eu.org (my
Simon Matter wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:42:02 +0100
Tomas Janousek [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
tjanouse Looks correct. (will not terminate if it reaches NGROUPS, don't
know if that
tjanouse can happen though)
Oops, it never happen.
It is intended to be safe-keeping for avoiding
Hi,
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:42:02 +0100
Tomas Janousek [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
tjanouse Looks correct. (will not terminate if it reaches NGROUPS, don't
know if that
tjanouse can happen though)
Oops, it never happen.
It is intended to be safe-keeping for avoiding endless-loop.
tjanouse
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 06:39:45AM -0500, Ken Murchison wrote:
That's friggin' great! We can't exactly force people to have a
particular version of glibc just to run Cyrus 2.3.10. Either we need to
come up with something that will run on all systems, or I'll be inclined
to remove the
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 06:39:45AM -0500, Ken Murchison wrote:
That's friggin' great! We can't exactly force people to have a
particular version of glibc just to run Cyrus 2.3.10. Either we need to
come up with something that will run on all systems, or I'll be inclined
to remove the
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 07:36:24PM +0100, Simon Matter wrote:
It may not be worth for you to worry about it but it is worth for me and
maybe also for Ken. People using my RPMs expect things to work. And
people
do use it on affected systems and they fill my mailbox or the list with
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 07:36:24PM +0100, Simon Matter wrote:
It may not be worth for you to worry about it but it is worth for me and
maybe also for Ken. People using my RPMs expect things to work. And
people
do use it on affected systems and they fill my mailbox or the list with
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 07:36:24PM +0100, Simon Matter wrote:
It may not be worth for you to worry about it but it is worth for me and
maybe also for Ken. People using my RPMs expect things to work. And people
do use it on affected systems and they fill my mailbox or the list with
complaints
Bron Gondwana wrote:
On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 07:19:26PM -0800, Rich Wales wrote:
What is the current status of 2.3.10? Right after it was announced
a couple of weeks ago, I saw some people reporting problems. Are
there any patches? Or is 2.3.10 still believed to be OK as is?
I'm running
On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 08:57:29AM +0100, Rudy Gevaert wrote:
Bron Gondwana wrote:
On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 07:19:26PM -0800, Rich Wales wrote:
What is the current status of 2.3.10? Right after it was announced
a couple of weeks ago, I saw some people reporting problems. Are
there any
On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 07:19:26PM -0800, Rich Wales wrote:
What is the current status of 2.3.10? Right after it was announced
a couple of weeks ago, I saw some people reporting problems. Are
there any patches? Or is 2.3.10 still believed to be OK as is?
I'm running 2.3.9 on a FreeBSD 6.2
What is the current status of 2.3.10? Right after it was announced
a couple of weeks ago, I saw some people reporting problems. Are
there any patches? Or is 2.3.10 still believed to be OK as is?
I'm running 2.3.9 on a FreeBSD 6.2 master and an Ubuntu 7.10 replica
server setup, and I want to
Hi,
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 22:36:45 +0200
Tomas Janousek [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
tjanouse Hi,
tjanouse On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 02:35:05AM +0900, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
tjanouse Yes. It should read ret == -1 ngroups != newstate-ngroups.
I'm really
tjanouse confused why I put the ret != -1 in
Tomas Janousek wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 03:52:24PM +0900, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
It seems to me from the source of getgrouplist() that it sets the
actual number of groups found to ngroups only when it returns 0.
When it returns -1, the number of groups actually filled is set to
Hi,
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 09:57:45 -0400
Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
murch I don't have easy access to a BSD platform. Would somebody be willing
murch to write and test such a patch?
How about this patch?
Index: lib/auth_unix.c
diff -u -p lib/auth_unix.c.orig lib/auth_unix.c
---
Hi,
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 19:42:02 +0100
Tomas Janousek [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
tjanouse Looks correct. (will not terminate if it reaches NGROUPS, don't know
if that
tjanouse can happen though)
Oops, it never happen.
It is intended to be safe-keeping for avoiding endless-loop.
tjanouse But as
Hi,
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 14:02:59 +0200
Tomas Janousek [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
tjanouse On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 03:30:30PM -0400, Ken Murchison wrote:
Perhaps, it should be:
do {
groupids = (gid_t *)xrealloc((gid_t *)groupids,
ngroups *
Simon Matter wrote:
Simon Matter wrote:
Simon Matter wrote:
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl 2.1.15
binaries:
I once posted to the list that 2.3.9 needs at least cyrus-sasl-2.1.19.
As
a package maintainer I know that :)
Did you ever figure out why? I'm not
Quoting Ken Murchison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
John Capo wrote:
On Thu, October 25, 2007 21:10, John Capo wrote:
Quoting Ken Murchison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Simon Matter wrote:
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl 2.1.15
binaries:
I once posted to the list that
John Capo wrote:
Quoting Ken Murchison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
John Capo wrote:
On Thu, October 25, 2007 21:10, John Capo wrote:
Quoting Ken Murchison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Simon Matter wrote:
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl 2.1.15
binaries:
I once posted to
Tomas Janousek wrote:
Hello,
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 04:50:02PM +0200, Simon Matter wrote:
--- auth_unix.c.~1.46.~ 2007-09-27 16:02:45.0 -0400
+++ auth_unix.c 2007-10-25 23:02:15.0 -0400
@@ -225,7 +225,7 @@
struct group *grp;
#ifdef HAVE_GETGROUPLIST
gid_t
Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:03:35 -0400
Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
murch John Capo wrote:
On Thu, October 25, 2007 21:10, John Capo wrote:
Quoting Ken Murchison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Simon Matter wrote:
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside
Hi,
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:03:35 -0400
Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
murch John Capo wrote:
On Thu, October 25, 2007 21:10, John Capo wrote:
Quoting Ken Murchison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Simon Matter wrote:
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl 2.1.15
Hi,
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 11:13:01 -0400
Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
murch Tomas Janousek wrote:
Hello,
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 04:50:02PM +0200, Simon Matter wrote:
--- auth_unix.c.~1.46.~ 2007-09-27 16:02:45.0 -0400
+++ auth_unix.c 2007-10-25 23:02:15.0
Hi,
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:40:31 -0400
Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
murch From limits.h on my Fedora box:
murch #define NGROUPS_MAX65536
murch It seems like a waste of memory to use NGROUPS_MAX as the default size
murch on this platform.
Umm, okay. Sorry for the noise.
The
Hi,
Sat, 27 Oct 2007 02:31:32 +0900,
Hajimu UMEMOTO [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
ume The code is suspicious to me. Isn't the test of `ret != -1' is
ume opposite?
ume Further, it seems that the test of `ngroups == newstate-ngroups'
ume assumes that newstate-ngroups holds the actual number of groups
Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 11:13:01 -0400
Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
murch Tomas Janousek wrote:
Hello,
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 04:50:02PM +0200, Simon Matter wrote:
--- auth_unix.c.~1.46.~ 2007-09-27 16:02:45.0 -0400
+++ auth_unix.c 2007-10-25
I've just compiled 2.3.10 on batten.eu.org (my private x86 servers)
and although it looks OK on the Solaris 10 system, it's in deep
trouble on the elderly Linux machine. Both are upgrades from 2.3.7,
the Solaris box is a replication target, the Linux box is a
replication master that
On 25 Oct 07, at 1230, Ian G Batten wrote:
I've just compiled 2.3.10 on batten.eu.org (my private x86 servers)
and although it looks OK on the Solaris 10 system, it's in deep
trouble on the elderly Linux machine. Both are upgrades from
2.3.7, the Solaris box is a replication target,
What does imapd.conf look like?
Does the output of 'ctl_mboxlist -d' look reasonable?
Does 'mbexamine user.igb' look reasonable?
Ian G Batten wrote:
I've just compiled 2.3.10 on batten.eu.org (my private x86 servers) and
although it looks OK on the Solaris 10 system, it's in deep
Ian G Batten wrote:
On 25 Oct 07, at 1248, Ken Murchison wrote:
What does imapd.conf look like?
Does the output of 'ctl_mboxlist -d' look reasonable?
Does 'mbexamine user.igb' look reasonable?
OK, there's a steady stream of imapd processes being forked and then
dying on SIGSEGV.
Ian G Batten wrote:
On 25 Oct 07, at 1230, Ian G Batten wrote:
I've just compiled 2.3.10 on batten.eu.org (my private x86 servers)
and although it looks OK on the Solaris 10 system, it's in deep
trouble on the elderly Linux machine. Both are upgrades from 2.3.7,
the Solaris box is a
Ian G Batten wrote:
On 25 Oct 07, at 1248, Ken Murchison wrote:
What does imapd.conf look like?
See second mail.
Does the output of 'ctl_mboxlist -d' look reasonable?
Yes.
ctl_mboxlist -d /tmp/foo
ctl_mboxlist -u /tmp/foo
ctl_mboxlist -d | diff -c - /tmp/foo
Check /tmp/foo
idled_shutdown_check: 0
Are you applying third-party patches? 'idled_shutdown_check' isn't
a valid option in the stock distro.
No: the config dates back to the dawn of time, but the installation
today is a straight download and compile.
ian
Cyrus Home Page:
On 25 Oct 07, at 1248, Ken Murchison wrote:
What does imapd.conf look like?
See second mail.
Does the output of 'ctl_mboxlist -d' look reasonable?
Yes.
ctl_mboxlist -d /tmp/foo
ctl_mboxlist -u /tmp/foo
ctl_mboxlist -d | diff -c - /tmp/foo
comes up clean, too.
Does 'mbexamine
On 10/25/07, Ian G Batten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've just compiled 2.3.10 on batten.eu.org (my private x86 servers)
and although it looks OK on the Solaris 10 system, it's in deep
trouble on the elderly Linux machine. Both are upgrades from 2.3.7,
the Solaris box is a replication target,
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl 2.1.15
binaries:
imapd 2.3.7 + sasl 2.1.15: works
imapd 2.3.7 + sasl 2.1.22: works
imapd 2.3.9 + sasl 2.1.15: not tried
imapd 2.3.9 + sasl 2.1.22: works
imapd 2.3.10 + sasl 2.1.15: fails (cannot examine mailboxes, then
coredumps
On 25 Oct 07, at 1248, Ken Murchison wrote:
What does imapd.conf look like?
Does the output of 'ctl_mboxlist -d' look reasonable?
Does 'mbexamine user.igb' look reasonable?
OK, there's a steady stream of imapd processes being forked and then
dying on SIGSEGV. I've caught one in the act.
Ian G Batten wrote:
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl 2.1.15
binaries:
imapd 2.3.7 + sasl 2.1.15: works
imapd 2.3.7 + sasl 2.1.22: works
imapd 2.3.9 + sasl 2.1.15: not tried
imapd 2.3.9 + sasl 2.1.22: works
imapd 2.3.10 + sasl 2.1.15: fails (cannot examine
On 25 Oct 07, at 1501, Ken Murchison wrote:
Ian G Batten wrote:
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl
2.1.15 binaries:
imapd 2.3.7 + sasl 2.1.15: works
imapd 2.3.7 + sasl 2.1.22: works
imapd 2.3.9 + sasl 2.1.15: not tried
imapd 2.3.9 + sasl 2.1.22: works
imapd
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl 2.1.15
binaries:
I once posted to the list that 2.3.9 needs at least cyrus-sasl-2.1.19. As
a package maintainer I know that :)
Regards,
Simon
imapd 2.3.7 + sasl 2.1.15: works
imapd 2.3.7 + sasl 2.1.22: works
imapd 2.3.9 + sasl
Simon Matter wrote:
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl 2.1.15
binaries:
I once posted to the list that 2.3.9 needs at least cyrus-sasl-2.1.19. As
a package maintainer I know that :)
Did you ever figure out why? I'm not surprised that code in Cyrus
somehow depends
Simon Matter wrote:
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl 2.1.15
binaries:
I once posted to the list that 2.3.9 needs at least cyrus-sasl-2.1.19.
As
a package maintainer I know that :)
Did you ever figure out why? I'm not surprised that code in Cyrus
I didn't
On Thu, October 25, 2007 21:10, John Capo wrote:
Quoting Ken Murchison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Simon Matter wrote:
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl 2.1.15
binaries:
I once posted to the list that 2.3.9 needs at least cyrus-sasl-2.1.19. As a
package
maintainer
change them?
thx
patrick
- Original Message -
From: Simon Matter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Ian G Batten [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Cyrus Mailing List
info-cyrus@lists.andrew.cmu.edu
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: Cyrus IMAPd 2.3.10
-
From: Simon Matter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Ian G Batten [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Cyrus Mailing List
info-cyrus@lists.andrew.cmu.edu
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: Cyrus IMAPd 2.3.10 Released
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations
Simon Matter wrote:
Simon Matter wrote:
On the Linux box, all fresh compilations aside from the sasl 2.1.15
binaries:
I once posted to the list that 2.3.9 needs at least cyrus-sasl-2.1.19.
As
a package maintainer I know that :)
Did you ever figure out why? I'm not surprised that code in
47 matches
Mail list logo
