Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-07 Thread Jesse Guardiani
On Friday 07 March 2003 12:29, Bill Shupp wrote: > On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 07:15 AM, Jesse Guardiani wrote: > > So, Bill, why don't you think Ken might not sign off on this? > > Because I can't read his mind. I put together what I think is > appropriate. That doesn't mean he will agree. Si

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-07 Thread Bill Shupp
On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 07:15 AM, Jesse Guardiani wrote: So, Bill, why don't you think Ken might not sign off on this? Because I can't read his mind. I put together what I think is appropriate. That doesn't mean he will agree. Since he was the one to implement vadddomain -u to support s

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-07 Thread Jesse Guardiani
On Friday 07 March 2003 10:13, Jesse Guardiani wrote: > On Friday 07 March 2003 09:47, Jesse Guardiani wrote: > > On Friday 07 March 2003 08:01, Brian Kolaci wrote: > > Hang on. I think I just realized what I've been missing > the entire time: > > The USER QUOTAS still work! That means that maildro

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-07 Thread Jesse Guardiani
On Friday 07 March 2003 09:47, Jesse Guardiani wrote: > On Friday 07 March 2003 08:01, Brian Kolaci wrote: Hang on. I think I just realized what I've been missing the entire time: The USER QUOTAS still work! That means that maildrop and courier still enforce them. But when you create a domain, y

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-07 Thread Jesse Guardiani
On Friday 07 March 2003 08:01, Brian Kolaci wrote: > > OK OK. Brian had me thinking that the quota was stored in a database > > with > > all of that talk about pw_shell and limits API calls. > > > I now see that (as I originally thought), the quota is actually stored > > in > > the 'maildir

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-07 Thread Brian Kolaci
> OK OK. Brian had me thinking that the quota was stored in a database with all of that talk about pw_shell and limits API calls. > > I now see that (as I originally thought), the quota is actually stored in the 'maildirsize' file. (I opened it up and looked at it > in my maildir) It i

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Jesse Guardiani
- Original Message - From: "Bill Shupp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 6:56 PM Subject: Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question > On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 01:40 PM, Brian Kolaci wrote: > > > I guess I

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Bill Shupp
On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 01:40 PM, Brian Kolaci wrote: I guess I wasn't explicit enough. I assumed people already knew how the quota's are stored. The "user quota" for vpopmail is stored in the pw_shell attribute of the vqpasswd structure. Where this information is stored (db, cdb, file)

RE: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Michael Bowe
> -Original Message- > From: Jesse Guardiani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, 7 March 2003 9:09 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question > As far as I can tell, maildirsize is only recalculated from > scratch when i

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Jesse Guardiani
On Thursday 06 March 2003 16:40, Brian Kolaci wrote: > > If vpopmail stores the actual user quota in a database, and the > > maildirsize file just stores the current size of the maildir (which IS > > a file based system, BTW), then doesn't that mean that Maildrop has > > NEVER been capable

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Brian Kolaci
> If vpopmail stores the actual user quota in a database, and the maildirsize > file just stores the current size of the maildir (which IS a file based > system, BTW), then doesn't that mean that Maildrop has NEVER been capable > of enforcing maildir++ with vpopmail? I guess I wasn't expl

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Jesse Guardiani
On Thursday 06 March 2003 14:15, Brian Kolaci wrote: > > So the domain quotas aren't stored in a file, but rather in whatever > > Good luck trying to get everyone to swap to a file based system. > I personally like *everything* in the database rather than filesystem. > All the information (oth

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Brian Kolaci
> So the domain quotas aren't stored in a file, but rather in whatever database > backend you happen to be using? They are stored in either the .qmailadmin-limits file, or MySQL, if enabled. The "user" quota is stored in the "pw_shell" attribute of the password entry for the user. > >

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Jesse Guardiani
On Thursday 06 March 2003 13:49, Brian Kolaci wrote: > > > I'd be curious to see if Mr. Sam accepts such patches. I personally > > > think that this new non-system domain quota feature is unnecessary, > > > when system quotas are available, easily implemented, and a better > > > solution.

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Brian Kolaci
> > I'd be curious to see if Mr. Sam accepts such patches. I personally > > think that this new non-system domain quota feature is unnecessary, > > when system quotas are available, easily implemented, and a better > > solution. But enough people seemed to want it for some reason, and

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Jesse Guardiani
On Thursday 06 March 2003 13:20, Bill Shupp wrote: > On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 10:05 AM, Jesse Guardiani wrote: > I'd be curious to see if Mr. Sam accepts such patches. I personally > think that this new non-system domain quota feature is unnecessary, > when system quotas are available, e

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Bill Shupp
On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 10:05 AM, Jesse Guardiani wrote: Thanks, Bill, but Brian was kind enough to answer most of my questions directly. Last time I checked, mailing lists were a good place for open discussion. Of course they are. But reading documentation can reduce unnecessary traffic

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Jesse Guardiani
On Thursday 06 March 2003 11:28, Bill Shupp wrote: > On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 06:16 AM, Jesse Guardiani wrote: > > Howdy list, > > > > I'm just wondering a few things about the new domain wide quotas: > > > > Are these quotas implemented in vdelivermail? > > > > Or are they implemented with

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Bill Shupp
On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 06:16 AM, Jesse Guardiani wrote: Howdy list, I'm just wondering a few things about the new domain wide quotas: Are these quotas implemented in vdelivermail? Or are they implemented with system quotas? Will I still be able to use maildrop to filter my mail? I add

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Brian Kolaci
> > > Or are they implemented with system quotas? > > > > You can do that also if you wish, however you'll need to > > supply your own scripts for that. > > So, basically, no? What would I have to supply to use system > quotas? If you wish to use system quota's, you'll need to wr

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Jesse Guardiani
On Thursday 06 March 2003 09:49, Brian Kolaci wrote: > > Howdy list, > > > > I'm just wondering a few things about the new domain wide quotas: > > > > Are these quotas implemented in vdelivermail? > > Yes. Ok. > > > Or are they implemented with system quotas? > > You can do that also

Re: [vchkpw] new quota support question

2003-03-06 Thread Brian Kolaci
> Howdy list, > > I'm just wondering a few things about the new domain wide quotas: > > Are these quotas implemented in vdelivermail? Yes. > Or are they implemented with system quotas? You can do that also if you wish, however you'll need to supply your own scripts for that. >