FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-07-2008, 08:37 AM
Steve Lamb
 
Default mutt's IMAP support

Jochen Schulz wrote:

I am now seeing that mutt has a "trash" option which moves mail to a
designated trash folder instead of deleting from the server. I don't use
that, though. (Coincidentally, it appears to be buggy: #448241.)


And it is this that I was referring to since it is what matches TBird's
behavior of having a trash folder. I just did a test with mutt and TBird.
What mutt does is download every message and then uploads it to the server in
the new folder. One message at a time. So download message one, upload
message one, download message 2, upload message 2. TBird marks the messages
as read and, if I am not mistaken, issues a COPY command to the server and
lets the server handle copying the messages from the mailbox to the trash.


The test involved mutt taking more time to "trash" 45 message than TBird
to "trash" over 1600 messages. Yes, I am aware that the if I open the mailbox
in mutt those messages are still present and only marked as deleted but at
this point what matters is that I can go into the trash and see all 1600
messages in there. I can do so while mutt is still chugging away at its 45
messages.


--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-07-2008, 09:56 AM
Jochen Schulz
 
Default mutt's IMAP support

Steve Lamb:
> Jochen Schulz wrote:
>> I am now seeing that mutt has a "trash" option which moves mail to a
>> designated trash folder instead of deleting from the server. I don't use
>> that, though. (Coincidentally, it appears to be buggy: #448241.)
>
> And it is this that I was referring to since it is what matches
> TBird's behavior of having a trash folder.

Ok, now I understand your complaint. If mutt's implementation of an IMAP
copy consists of fetching an old mail and storing it as a new mail in
another folder (instead of using server-side copy), that's quite
seriously broken. But as far as I can see, this only happens when using
the "trash" option (which is broken anyway, you cannot delete from the
trash folder).

But ok, I conclude there actually are flaws. I just don't happen to be
affected by them.

J.
--
When I am doing sex I wonder if my emotions can be detected by alien
civilisations.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 02:07 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org