Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 ... Last
[#] Wed Jul 05 2017 13:55:18 EDT from s3cr3to @ Uncensored to Citadel_Support <room_Citadel_Support@uncensored.citadel.org>

Subject: Re: db->compact() on 8.17

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Easy_install/current I want to do that... but really I got a lot of work
in my hands. I don't lose my hope yet: to migrate to easy_install in
this life :)

Just that first I want to compact the DBs, that huge file I hope it has
a lot of unused space because my ignorance to manage correctly the
expired messages.

Thanks Freakdog

[#] Wed Jul 05 2017 16:16:39 EDT from s3cr3to @ Uncensored to IGnatius T Foobar <ajc@citadel.org>

Subject: Re: db->compact() on 8.17

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

IG, trying to compile the source, I got this errors (solved I hope)

I only have this questions:
* The db_version_major can be 4?
* Can I run this tool on an backup directory to test it?

* In my system I got this db version:
i db4.6-util 4.6.21-16

Searching I found this:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2814686/what-is-the-difference-between-the-different-berkeleydb-versions-and-which-shou/2823053#2823053

"4.4: Adds Database compaction, in-memory databases, Peer-to-Peer HA"

I wonder if is ok just to change this lines:

#if DB_VERSION_MAJOR < 5
#error Citadel requires Berkeley DB v5.0 or newer. Please upgrade.
#endif

to:
#if DB_VERSION_MAJOR < 4
#error Citadel requires Berkeley DB v4.4 or newer. Please upgrade.
#endif

* using aptitude i found and install both:
Setting up libdb4.8-dev (4.8.30-2) ...
Setting up libdb-dev (4.8) ...
Setting up zlib1g-dev (1:1.2.3.4.dfsg-3) ...

* and now I can compile and got this:
# cc ctdlsqueeze.c -ldb -o ctdlsqueeze
# ls -l
total 16
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 9483 Jul 5 14:05 ctdlsqueeze
-rw-r--r-- 1 s3 s3 3823 Jul 5 13:50 ctdlsqueeze.c

I'm very rusted on C... I will try to create a "dummy" variant to answer
my previous questions working with backups.

Regards

[#] Mon Jul 10 2017 14:39:31 EDT from janik @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Hey everyone,

 

i can send emails but not receive. error is 551 relaying denied..

what could i do?

 

 



[#] Mon Jul 10 2017 21:10:21 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: Big number of messages...

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

My concern is that, when I go in a folder which contains nearly
200,000 messages, I get the good number at top of screen, but I can
only see around 32000 messages (I guess, because I see only to 19th
of may 2015). And worse, only the olders...

Are you viewing the folder with an IMAP client, or with WebCit?

IMAP does not, to the best of my knowledge, have a fixed limit of how many messages it can present. WebCit does, but if you have the source code online I can point out where to change it.

WebCit-NG will not have any such limits, but that doesn't help you right now :)

[#] Mon Jul 10 2017 21:11:38 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: db->compact()

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Any noticeable performance hit?

Very much so, which is why it will not be enabled by default, and even when enabled it will only run once per night, after the completion of an auto-purger run.

[#] Mon Jul 10 2017 21:13:12 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

i can send emails but not receive. error is 551 relaying denied..

what could i do?

First make sure it's actually Citadel that's listening on port 25 of your server. Telnet to port 25, and you should see something like

220 uncensored.citadel.org ESMTP Citadel server ready.

If it doesn't say "Citadel" somewhere in the greeting, you have another mail server running, and it needs to be shut off.

[#] Mon Jul 10 2017 21:55:14 EDT from Christian.Commarmond @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: Big number of messages...

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Mon Jul 10 2017 21:10:21 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored Subject: Re: Big number of messages...
My concern is that, when I go in a folder which contains nearly
200,000 messages, I get the good number at top of screen, but I can
only see around 32000 messages (I guess, because I see only to 19th
of may 2015). And worse, only the olders...

Are you viewing the folder with an IMAP client, or with WebCit?

IMAP does not, to the best of my knowledge, have a fixed limit of how many messages it can present. WebCit does, but if you have the source code online I can point out where to change it.

WebCit-NG will not have any such limits, but that doesn't help you right now :)

 

Hello Ignatius,

bad news... again.

In my Citadel display, under the View As:, I saw a small piece of white line... When I tried to click it, I discovered that it is a page number... For my 78000 messages list, I says 158 pages. But It does not show anything after the 23rd... After this one, only white pages.

My older message is 1/1/2015, and I just see january 2015 messages... 

I wonder if the choice of Berkeley is one of the problem? Do you need to reload all messages to memory at each time? And you are short of memory? I have a quite fast server, 2 Xeon in a Dell R720 with raid disks, and citadel is in a virtual server on it, with 8Gb of RAM, and it takes some time to get the display.

Other point of interest: most of these mails are automated reports coming from customers. Gmail groups them per source/title/day, so for some repeating emails, I see one line for 100 mails. Could you do the same thing with Citadel?

My 70000++ list would become less than 17000...

So, the problems I see now:

- Page selector is hidden because I have: "Make this my startpage", then "Logged in as...", then a search field, then "View As:" which fills the header space, So, the page selector is 90% hidden.

- Mails cannot display more than a few hundreds (or thousands), even if the count is good in the header, and the number of pages is good too.

- (Worse), we always see first the oldest mails, when we should (IMHO) see first the newest.

Point One seems easy to solve by moving a field around.

Point 2 (and 3) seems more tricky, if it is a memory problem, I still can put more memory to my server... But how much? My biggest 'floor' would contain more than 300000 messages.

Point 3? Is it easily solvable? This is a blocking point... I cannot send new reports to Citadel if I cannot see them... The full point for me is to NOT USE client software, since I move(travel) a lot and I cannot install software on most of the computers I use, and I cannot sync 15gb of emails on my phone... Reason why I need to use the web interface...

 

For your information, I am studying the source code now, I need time to know where are the things... I'd like to do an Oracle XE (free Oracle DB) interface. This would help to move some stuffs to the database. But this will take time, if I can do it, because I am very busy and it is a long time since I worked we the C (and the Pro*C Oracle interface).

Anyway, thank you for the interest you have for my problems... When would the NG version come out?

 

Best regards,

Christian COMMARMOND



[#] Mon Jul 10 2017 22:05:20 EDT from Christian.Commarmond @ Uncensored

Subject: Search not working on messages?

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Again...

I tried to do a search on messages, entering a part of header in the search field. Nothing comes back, and it is then impossible to get back the messages by clearing the search field... I had  to change room. 

Maybe the search field needs a special syntax?

 

Christian COMMARMOND



[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 02:52:33 EDT from Harq @ Uncensored

Subject: Is it possible to run Citadel on Freebsd 11.0?

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]



[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 03:02:03 EDT from Harq123 @ Uncensored

Subject: Is it possible to run Citadel on Freebsd 11.0?

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Hello,

I read the install doc for Freebsd, it states it takes some tweaking to get it to work.  I also understand that there is no support for Freebsd.  So I am just wondering if i could throw myself at the mercy of those on the BBS and ask if it is possible.  I am sure anything is possible.  I did all the steps that SteffenFritz listed. The install script bombed out compiling dbinc.  Again, i understand you can just say FreeBSD is not supported. I did some research and there is some patch that fixes this. 

ERROR BELOW

checking for 64-bit integral type support for sequences... yes
configure: creating ./config.status
config.status: creating Makefile
config.status: creating db_cxx.h
config.status: creating db_int.h
config.status: creating clib_port.h
config.status: creating include.tcl
config.status: creating db.h
config.status: creating db_config.h
config.status: executing libtool commands
./libtool --mode=compile cc -c -I. -I../src  -D_THREAD_SAFE -O3  ../src/mutex/mut_tas.c
libtool: compile:  cc -c -I. -I../src -D_THREAD_SAFE -O3 ../src/mutex/mut_tas.c -o mut_tas.o
In file included from ../src/mutex/mut_tas.c:11:
In file included from ./db_int.h:999:
In file included from ../src/dbinc/mutex.h:15:
In file included from ../src/dbinc/mutex_int.h:12:
../src/dbinc/atomic.h:179:19: error: definition of builtin function '__atomic_compare_exchange'
static inline int __atomic_compare_exchange(
                  ^
1 error generated.
gmake: *** [Makefile:2085: mut_tas.o] Error 1
Operating system:
:q!

Link to possible fix for OSX

https://github.com/narkoleptik/os-x-berkeleydb-patch

 

Again, thank you.  I will be falling back to Centos or something similar if this does not work.

 

Citadel looks very cool.



[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 11:09:52 EDT from athos-mn @ Uncensored

Subject: TLS Encryption

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I'm just following up on a message from last year where TLS encryption wasn't yet part of Citadel. Has that been added to the roadmap (or added and I missed it)? 



[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 12:55:45 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

Subject: Shrinking of database files on disk

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Ok, here's the "final word" (at least for now) on the ability to shrink Citadel database files on disk after data has been deleted.

I experimented with a standalone utility to do this, and it trashed my database.  So that's a non-starter.  :)

Beginning with the next release of Citadel Server, there will be a hidden configuration setting called "c_shrink_db_files".  If this setting does not exist or is set to 0, the normal behavior continues, where deleting objects in Citadel causes free space to appear in the database files, which will be used for new data.  If "c_shrink_db_files" exists and is set to 1 (or any nonzero value), the DB->compact() function will be called after THE DREADED AUTO-PURGER (tm) completes its run each night.  This will return unused space back to the underlying filesystem.

Because we have not had the opportunity to perform thorough testing on this function, it remains undocumented and unsupported.  If someone out there would like to perform thorough testing, it would be quite helpful.  The needed test would be to set up a test system, activate the shrink option, and then ... every day, enter massive amounts of data into Citadel, then delete it, observe the size of the database files, come back the next morning and see if they shrunk, and repeat for a number of days.  During the testing period, the test system should of course also be observed for any unexpected behavior.

Here at the Citadel project we are very serious about data integrity.  We don't mind the "move fast and break things" approach when it comes to functionality, but the system must never lose data.  This is why the shrink option is not being rolled out casually.



[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 12:56:17 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: TLS Encryption

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Wed Jul 12 2017 11:09:52 AM EDT from athos-mn @ Uncensored Subject: TLS Encryption

I'm just following up on a message from last year where TLS encryption wasn't yet part of Citadel. Has that been added to the roadmap (or added and I missed it)? 



I don't remember the discussion that took place last year.  What part of the system needed encryption that didn't already have it?



[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 13:48:46 EDT from athos-mn @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: TLS Encryption

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Outbound SMTP. Here's the discussion (just two messages that I can see): http://uncensored.citadel.org/readfwd?go=Citadel%20Support?start_reading_at=4090070#4090070 and the relevant quote:

 

"I wasn't aware that Google is now red-flagging any emails that don't arrive via encrypted SMTP. That sucks. Citadel doesn't send out SMTP connections with TLS encryption in the current version, sorry to say. Since the mighty Google overlords now seem to be shaming everyone for doing that, I suppose we should put it on the short list. "

 

 

Wed Jul 12 2017 12:56:17 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored Subject: Re: TLS Encryption

 

Wed Jul 12 2017 11:09:52 AM EDT from athos-mn @ Uncensored Subject: TLS Encryption

I'm just following up on a message from last year where TLS encryption wasn't yet part of Citadel. Has that been added to the roadmap (or added and I missed it)? 



I don't remember the discussion that took place last year.  What part of the system needed encryption that didn't already have it?



 



[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 16:24:53 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: TLS Encryption

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Ah yes ... that :)

Something very relevant has happened between then and now. All outbound protocol handling is now performed by libcurl, which was already a dependency so it didn't cost anything to use. This reduced the Citadel Server by thousands of LoC and removed two other external dependencies.

Right now, if you are using a smart-host for outbound mail, you can specify that smart-host as "smtps://username:password@smtp.domain.com" (for example) and it will do exactly what it looks like it ought to do.

What it does *not* yet do, is try SMTPS for every outbound connection when it is delivering directly to the destination. Based on a quick read of the code, I'm thinking that if we modified getmx() to return all of the MX records prefixed by "smtps://"
followed by all of the same MX records prefixed by "smtp://" it would probably produce the desired result.

I'm a little strapped for time right now, but if you have the ability to build from git-master and operate a test system, this could be another thing we can do with a hidden configuration option? (The more I think about this methodology, the more I like it ... it's a good way to engage the community of Citadel site operators to help with testing.)

[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 17:10:06 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: TLS Encryption

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Ok, forget all that stuff I said about smtps:// and smtp://

https://curl.haxx.se/libcurl/c/CURLOPT_USE_SSL.html ]

It turns out there's a libcurl option we can set with one line of code to tell it to attempt STARTTLS if the other end offers it.  It's yet another example of why it was such a big win to let libcurl do all of the heavy lifting on these things.

So the offer stands -- if you have the ability to test it, I'll put it in as an unsupported and hidden configuration option.



[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 19:00:11 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: TLS Encryption

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The option is called "c_smtpclient_try_starttls" and is available in git-master starting now. It will be included (but not documented or supported yet) in the next release. Set this option to 1 to get it to try STARTTLS on outbound SMTP connections, when available.

[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 21:16:41 EDT from bennabiy @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: TLS Encryption

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I agree. You know I do not mind testing, but this is a use case I cannot test on because all my mail through citadel is strictly internal. If I do get opportunity, I will let you know :)

Wed Jul 12 2017 04:24:53 PM EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored Subject: Re: TLS Encryption
Ah yes ... that :)

Something very relevant has happened between then and now. All outbound protocol handling is now performed by libcurl, which was already a dependency so it didn't cost anything to use. This reduced the Citadel Server by thousands of LoC and removed two other external dependencies.

Right now, if you are using a smart-host for outbound mail, you can specify that smart-host as "smtps://username:password@smtp.domain.com" (for example) and it will do exactly what it looks like it ought to do.

What it does *not* yet do, is try SMTPS for every outbound connection when it is delivering directly to the destination. Based on a quick read of the code, I'm thinking that if we modified getmx() to return all of the MX records prefixed by "smtps://"
followed by all of the same MX records prefixed by "smtp://" it would probably produce the desired result.

I'm a little strapped for time right now, but if you have the ability to build from git-master and operate a test system, this could be another thing we can do with a hidden configuration option? (The more I think about this methodology, the more I like it ... it's a good way to engage the community of Citadel site operators to help with testing.)

 



[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 21:27:00 EDT from bennabiy @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: TLS Encryption

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

That is great news. 

 

For those who are willing to try this, and not sure how to go about setting undocumented options (in easy install):

/usr/local/citadel/sendcommand "CONF PUTVAL|c_smtpclient_try_starttls|1"

where the c_smtpclient_try_starttls would be replaced with whatever option (documented or undocumented) and the next value after the | is the intended state.

A list of documented options (which most also have a GUI place to set them as well) is found at:

http://www.citadel.org/doku.php/documentation:appproto:system_config#confgetorsetglobalconfigurationoptions

with a summary of what I just said above at: 

http://www.citadel.org/doku.php/faq:systemadmin:edit_config_the_hard_way

The option is called "c_smtpclient_try_starttls" and is available in git-master starting now. It will be included (but not documented or supported yet) in the next release. Set this option to 1 to get it to try STARTTLS on outbound SMTP connections, when available.

 



[#] Wed Jul 12 2017 22:22:49 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: TLS Encryption

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Good tip. :)

Configuration options can also be set using ctdlsh, if you have it.


Go to page: First ... 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 ... Last