You are describing a scenario where POP is the WRONG answer. You might want to try IMAP which is more geared to keeping data on the server than having smart clients. IMAP servers abound, commercial and free.
Quoting 彭國達 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Randall: > > Thank you so much for your idea. Actually, I did it in a different way > and got what I want. You told me to comment out line 57 delete_msg. I tried > but didn't work (maybe I didn't understand what you mean). I change > delete_msg call to undelete_msg call. When delete_msg is called, qpopper > actually mark messages as undelete. It work with outlook express so far. > Others should be teseted later. > Any idea for this kind of trick? > Will it cause any problem? > > In response to your curiosity: > The story wourld sound like: > > User pcs are always infected by virus and crashed by some other reason. > Users don't have any sense to backup their important files from mail to file > server IT people feel it too much trouble to educate users. Whenever their > pc crashed, important messages or even files are lost. IT people don't want > to use tar or tape backup and restore utility to backup user maildrop. My > idea is that, we can use a secondary mail server as mail backup server. By > using aliases name, user mail can be forwarded to secondary mail server. > Secondary server will have a big enough disk array to store mail for about > one year. Of course, secondary are redundant for first mail server. > Whenever pc crashed, user can retrieve all their mail from the secondary > (mail for this year). After they retrieve backup mail from secondary, mail > should be kept, not deleted. They can retrieve mail again from secondary > server, if their pc crashed and mail lost again. Also, IT people feel it > extremely difficult to ask user to configure their mail client software to > keep mail archive in mail server. That's why I asked for this solution. > I know there must some other solutions, but this one is fully automatic > and the best (so far) in my idea. If you have any better idea, please let > me know. I would appreciate it very much. > Still there are a lot to consider. Like, will the big maildrop infected > system performance, can qpopper handle single maildrop larger 200MB or even > 400MB. Let me know if you have any valuable suggestion or experience for my > idea. > > Thanks so much again, > dp > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Randall Gellens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "匆f芞F" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Subscribers of Qpopper" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 9:37 AM > Subject: Re: don't want to delete messages > > > > At 7:16 PM +0800 11/14/01, 匆f芞F wrote: > > >Situation: When mail client quit session, qpopper should automatically > keep > > >all messages in mailbox, although mail client choose to delete messages > > >after session close and mail been retrieved. > > > > If you want Qpopper to ignore DELE commands, there currently isn't a > > way to do that. You could of course modify the source, for example, > > change pop_dele.c to not mark the message as deleted (comment out > > line 57), or change pop_updt.c to not delete messages even if they > > are marked deleted, or change the table in pop_get_command.c (line > > 65) so that 'quit' in the TRANSACTION state calls pop_restore() > > instead of pop_quit(). The first one would likely be the easiest, > > and the file least likely to change in future releases. > > > > I don't recall anyone ever asking for this before, so I'm curious why > > you want to keep all messages. > > -- > >
