[windows2000] Zimbra (Was: RE: Re: Exchange 2003 or 2007)
- From: "Sorin Srbu" <sorin.srbu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:49:09 +0100
Berny Stapleton <> scribbled on Tuesday, February 19, 2008 1:14 PM:
I failed making it start properly, especially the ldap. I think the main
problem is that I don't have access to tweaking and updating the A, MX etc
dns-entries, on which zimbra apparantely relies heavily. Doens't seem to
difficult to set up though for a rookie like me, FWIW.
Install went otherwise fine on CentOS5 (binary compatible with RHEL5). I might
try this at home though, but it'll be during the summer vacations or
something, as it seems this thing will need some time to setup properly.
I tried initially to run zimbra on a machine with 512M (2x 256) RAM, with the
result that it swapped like crazy. Adding 2x 512M sticks and 1x 256M got rid
of all swapping. I ran this on a 3GHz Celeron. Seems like the cpu is at least
good enough. It all runs down to reading the sys req's (more) carefully. 8-)
> Yep, sure. I would be interested in hearing about it.
>
> On 19/02/2008, Sorin Srbu <sorin.srbu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Ray Costanzo <> scribbled on Tuesday, February 19, 2008 1:06 PM:
>>
>> I'm currently installing Zimbra on a CentOS5 VM to see how it turns out
>> (that is, if I can install it all...).
>>
>> I can report to this list if anybody is interested in this *non-windows*
>> solution and if Jim agrees?
>>
>>
>>> Believe me, I felt ridiculous the first time I installed Exchange at home,
>>> and I've used it off and on since then. But now I'm going back to it for
>>> these reasons,
>>>
>>> 1. I'm sick of PSTs. I have nightly backups that run, and I ungracefully
>>> rkill outlook.exe so my PSTs will back up.
>>>
>>> 2. I have four different mail clients from which I'd like to access my
>>> e-mail. It's a PITA dealing with POP and maintaining the right
>>> configuration of which clients should leave messages on the server for how
>>> long and under what conditions.
>>>
>>> 3. I'm too cheap to buy the version of the mail server software that I'm
>>> using that includes IMAP support. :)
>>>
>>> 4. The webmail is decent enough for someone who doesn't like webmail.
>>>
>>> Ray
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:windows2000-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Angus Macdonald
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 5:00 AM
>>> To: windows2000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [windows2000] Re: Exchange 2003 or 2007
>>>
>>> I wouldn't think that anything new in 2007 would make it worth choosing
>>> over 2003, especially for a home network (how big is your home that you
>>> even NEED an Exchange server?!). I suppose the biggest difference is that
>>> 2007 is 64-bit only so you'll need to run it on W2K3-64.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *****************************
>>> New Site from The Kenzig Group!
>>> Windows Vista Links, list options
>>> and info are available at:
>>> http://www.VistaPop.com
>>> *****************************
>>> To Unsubscribe, set digest or vacation
>>> mode or view archives use the below link.
>>>
>>> http://thethin.net/win2000list.cfm
>>
>>
> *****************************
> New Site from The Kenzig Group!
> Windows Vista Links, list options
> and info are available at:
> http://www.VistaPop.com
> *****************************
> To Unsubscribe, set digest or vacation
> mode or view archives use the below link.
>
> http://thethin.net/win2000list.cfm
Other related posts:
- » [windows2000] Zimbra (Was: RE: Re: Exchange 2003 or 2007)
