Re: How to restore my mail?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 You *might* be able to restore it, *if* you use an alternate temp directory (i.e. if you set the $TMP environment variable, or the $tmpdir muttrc configuration setting, or maybe if your editor keeps draft files in a nonstandard place). Here, I'll walk you through it: > today I started to write a mail At this point, your mail was stored partly in the memory of your text editor (vim/emacs/pico, or whatever you use) and partly in a temporary directory on your disk (usually /tmp, or $TMP or $tmpdir, if you specify one of them in your ~/.muttrc). If your editor keeps draft files somewhere, there may have been a version of it there. Most editors that use draft files keep them in the same directory as the file they're editing (so, by default, with most common editors, the draft file would also be stored in /tmp). > stopped (= postponed) At this point, your mail was saved to your $postponed folder and deleted from the temporary directory. Your editor deleted its draft file. > resumed writing At this point, the mail was written to a temporary file on your disk (the same as composing the message the first time) and *deleted* from your $postponed folder. When your text editor loaded, it copied the message into memory, and maybe also into a draft file. > and - experienced a short power outage. At this point, the message was still technically saved to disk in that temporary file, though of course not including any unsaved changes. > No problem so far, but after booting my machine again, I can't find > the mail. BUT when you booted your machine, your operating system automatically deleted the contents of /tmp. This is considered a security feature, as well as simply good housekeeping. IF you had $TMP or $tmpdir pointed elsewhere, such as ~/.tmp/ or something similar, then your mail will still be there, in a file beginning with "mutt-". IF your editor keeps draft files somewhere other than the same directory as the file being edited (i.e. someplace that wasn't in /tmp), you may be able to recover it that way too. > It's not in the "postponed" file anymore. So my question is: > Where can I find my mail resp. how can I restore it? You *may* be out of luck. Here's hoping you aren't! Good luck! ~Kyle - -- Truth springs from argument amongst friends. -- David Hume -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iEYEARECAAYFAknC+YcACgkQBkIOoMqOI14VhQCfdWeZvgTSE3Wxqm9Ks5AcV9NN ZU4An07HX7S8l00y13whbiL4xHJ6C9Aj =A5A4 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
How to restore my mail?
Hi, today I started to write a mail, stopped (= postponed), resumed writing and - experienced a short power outage. No problem so far, but after booting my machine again, I can't find the mail. It's not in the "postponed" file anymore. So my question is: Where can I find my mail resp. how can I restore it? OS: Debian 5.0 (lenny) MUA: mutt 1.5.18 Editor: vim-tiny 7.1.314 Thanks in advance!
Re: Mutt crashing on exit or replying (sometimes)
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:42:13AM -0500, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > On Thursday, March 19 at 09:19 AM, quoth Joshua Tinnin: > >Any ideas? > > Unfortunately, no... I think you need to take that to the > mutt-...@mutt.org list. OK, well I appreciate the effort. I'll also try the freebsd lists. - jt
Re: questions regarding mutt as newsreader
Okay, I still don't understand why my folder-hook did not work. Just like setting the hostname has to be done very early. If someone is interested in my muttrc as to why that is, I will post it here. On the other hand, working with folder-hooks in conjunction with my newsserver works perfectly now: I get to keep a local message-copy and adjust my hostname accordingly. Thanks for the help! (Now I can file a report about a primary problem via newsgroup :P ) -- Time flies like the wind, but fruit flies like bananas.
Re: questions regarding mutt as newsreader
Hello Rocco, Rocco [19.Mär.2009 13:25]: You probably want something like: folder-hook . 'set record="^"' folder-hook ^news 'set record="=articles"' which would store all copies of outgoing articles to $folder/articles mailbox. Your suggestion works perfectly, thank you! folder-hook is the right one to use but the order matters. What's the order you tried? You can also try to use the URL from the above error message as that's apparently the folder URL: folder-hook newss://u...@news.motzarella.org:563 ... The order in which my hooks were defined was: folder-hook . 'set record="^"' ... folder-hook newss://news.motzarella.org 'set record="!"' I then went from defining a folder-hook to just setting set record = '^' in muttrc, above all hooks. I understand that the latter hook should replace the previous one, so I put all my folder-wide settings above all, then change some individually. What nntp patch do you use? (mutt -v should tell you) Have a look at the end of this message for the output. There is another thing that came to my attention. In order to post with a valid message-id I need to set the hostname to set hostname = 'mysubdomain.motzarella.org' If I do that close to the beginning of my muttrc, all is fine. But if I try to define that closer to the end of muttrc, the hostname will keep the system default setting. Which variable is causing that, since I define 'hostname=sample.name' just once (either at the top or at the bottom of muttrc)? This is basically what I get from 'mutt -v' (although no version-number of an nntp-patch, as far as I gather): -8<- Mutt 1.5.16 (2007-06-09) System: Linux 2.6.22-gentoo-r10 (i686) ncurses: ncurses 5.6.20061217 (compiled with 5.6) -DOMAIN -DEBUG +HOMESPOOL -USE_SETGID +USE_DOTLOCK +DL_STANDALONE -USE_FCNTL +USE_FLOCK -USE_INODESORT +USE_POP +USE_NNTP +USE_IMAP +USE_SMTP -USE_GSS +USE_SSL_OPENSSL -USE_SSL_GNUTLS -USE_SASL +HAVE_GETADDRINFO -HAVE_REGCOMP +USE_GNU_REGEX +HAVE_COLOR +HAVE_START_COLOR +HAVE_TYPEAHEAD +HAVE_BKGDSET +HAVE_CURS_SET +HAVE_META +HAVE_RESIZETERM +CRYPT_BACKEND_CLASSIC_PGP +CRYPT_BACKEND_CLASSIC_SMIME -CRYPT_BACKEND_GPGME -EXACT_ADDRESS -SUN_ATTACHMENT +ENABLE_NLS -LOCALES_HACK +COMPRESSED +HAVE_WC_FUNCS +HAVE_LANGINFO_CODESET +HAVE_LANGINFO_YESEXPR +HAVE_ICONV -ICONV_NONTRANS -HAVE_LIBIDN +HAVE_GETSID +USE_HCACHE -ISPELL SENDMAIL="/usr/sbin/sendmail" MAILPATH="Maildir" PKGDATADIR="/usr/share/mutt" SYSCONFDIR="/etc/mutt" EXECSHELL="/bin/sh" MIXMASTER="mixmaster" vvv.nntp patch-1.5.6.dw.pgp-timeout.1 patch-1.5.6.dw.mbox-hook.1 patch-1.5.16.rr.compressed.1 patch-1.5.4.lpr.collapse_flagged Lukas P. Ruf -8<- Thank you for your help so far! JP -- Time flies like the wind, but fruit flies like bananas.
Re: what is the benefit of imap? Another meta-question.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday, March 19 at 10:42 AM, quoth David Champion: > I think the best summary is that IMAP is a remote mailbox access > protocol, supporting all common mailbox operations at the protocol > level. POP is not: it supports full message retrieval, new-message scan > (kind of, via UIDL), and deletion. This makes it, at best, a queued > message pull protocol. Well, if you're comparing IMAP to POP, one of the common comparisons between them is that POP's simplicity lends itself to much more simple and lightweight server implementations. Thus, these implementations are easy to audit, easy to secure, and require less hardware to support hundreds of thousands of users. IMAP makes operations like server-side sorting and arbitrary tagging available and that puts more work on the server. IMAP clients are likely to stay connected for hours at a time (rather than poll periodically), and have a habit of keeping multiple connections open, making it easy for a single IMAP server to run out of ports if its supporting a large number of clients. POP3 clients rarely use multiple connections, and poll periodically instead of keeping a connection open, and thus POP3 servers are unlikely to run out of ports, but IMAP servers supporting large numbers of clients just might. > Most of the things that people cite as flaws of POP are really flaws > in particular implementations, not in the protocol. The POP > protocol is limited in scope, but I don't think this is a flaw; POP > just has a different design goal. Well, that's fair. The "flaw" of POP are, as far as I'm concerned, that it doesn't do what I want it to do... which is provide for management of multiple mailboxes. Not it's fault, I suppose, but still a reason not to use it. ~Kyle - -- If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you. -- Don Marquis -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iD8DBQFJwm2iBkIOoMqOI14RAvGEAKDON0+SUjXi/c4NOAXasuS55Z1lJQCg9DVj 7oZnmUx1l16zJk+1Pk3Xq6o= =eAkV -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: what is the benefit of imap? Another meta-question.
I think the best summary is that IMAP is a remote mailbox access protocol, supporting all common mailbox operations at the protocol level. POP is not: it supports full message retrieval, new-message scan (kind of, via UIDL), and deletion. This makes it, at best, a queued message pull protocol. But as someone else said, IMAP is just more flexible. You may not need all the features of IMAP, but since it fully encompasses everything that POP supports, why not use it? >> so the "leave mail on server" option that most pop-clients have is >> certainly not a convenient way to access your mail remotely from different >> locations. If you have minimal needs, it works alright. It's implementation- dependent since it's not done at the protocol level, but POP servers can track basic message and mailbox status. > Plus: POP needs locking, i.e. only one client at a time can access the > mailbox which implies that tools should not perform time-consuming tasks > while they have a POP session open. That's implementation-dependent though. A server might require locking, but it's not inherent to the protocol and it's possible to implement one that has few of the contstraints that people have mentioned in this thread. But historically, there are few really good POP servers, so in practical terms you're not wrong. Most of the things that people cite as flaws of POP are really flaws in particular implementations, not in the protocol. The POP protocol is limited in scope, but I don't think this is a flaw; POP just has a different design goal. (That said, it's really too bad that the POP and NNTP groups didn't join forces from the start. With an NNTP server that supported authentication and operationally understood the goals of user-oriented mailbox access, it would have been a completely reasonable alternative to both POP and IMAP, and much closer to IMAP in spirit.) -- -D.d...@uchicago.eduNSITUniversity of Chicago Just to clear the deck, I own no monkeys.
Re: Mutt crashing on exit or replying (sometimes)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday, March 19 at 09:19 AM, quoth Joshua Tinnin: >Any ideas? Unfortunately, no... I think you need to take that to the mutt-...@mutt.org list. ~Kyle - -- I know that there are people who do not love their fellow man, and I hate people like that! -- Tom Lehrer -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iD8DBQFJwmfVBkIOoMqOI14RArEWAJ9VzXPoN4sRODya+baMm7UzYS7zQgCeIqkY MK8CtTmwk2DeIB99cyI2+BM= =ZMLt -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Mutt crashing on exit or replying (sometimes)
Any ideas? - jt On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 01:07:00PM -0600, Joshua Tinnin wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 11:18:30AM -0500, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > > On Wednesday, March 11 at 10:36 AM, quoth Joshua Tinnin: > > >Here it is: > > > > > >Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > > >0x080cb71f in safe_strdup () > > >(gdb) backtrace > > >#0 0x080cb71f in safe_strdup () > > >#1 0x080b4d6a in rfc822_cpy_adr_real () > > >#2 0x080bc09c in mutt_default_from () > > >#3 0x080bc9d0 in ci_send_message () > > >#4 0x080a20d4 in mutt_pager () > > >#5 0x0805d753 in mutt_display_message () > > >#6 0x0806c3c3 in mutt_index_menu () > > >#7 0x0808c6e5 in main () > > >(gdb) > > > > Very strange! > > > > So, from what you've said so far, this crash happens when you tell > > mutt to quit. But this backtrace looks *completely* wrong for > > quitting. It looks like mutt crashed while attempting to send a > > message while viewing a message. Specifically, it crashed while > > attempting to copy the value of the $from variable. > > No, I said that Mutt crashed when quitting or replying to some messages. > This is a crash when I try to reply. > > > I assume that, when run inside the debugger, mutt crashed at a > > different place than you originally reported? If so, that means the > > reason it crashed *originally* was because it was dealing with memory > > that had been corrupted earlier, and inside the debugger we're able to > > catch it earlier. > > No, see above. > > > So, let's try a few things. First, let's check the values of $use_from > > and $from in your muttrc (obviously, mutt shouldn't crash no matter > > what those settings are, but it did crash, so now we're trying to > > figure out why). > > set use_from=yes > set from="j...@taosnet.com" > > > Second, instead of running mutt inside gdb with just > > the `run` command, try `run -d 5` so that mutt will create the > > ~/.muttdebug0 file. And when it crashes, let's see what the last few > > lines of that file look like. > > OK. > > Here's a backtrace from when I quit and it crashes: > > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > 0x28587029 in free () from /lib/libc.so.7 > (gdb) backtrace > #0 0x28587029 in free () from /lib/libc.so.7 > #1 0x080cb622 in safe_free () > #2 0x080b3648 in rfc822_free_address () > #3 0x08076965 in mutt_free_opt () > #4 0x080769e2 in mutt_free_opts () > #5 0x0808c704 in main () > (gdb) > > Here's the .muttdebug0: > > 25498 mutt_addr_is_user: no, all failed. > 25499 mutt_addr_is_user: no, all failed. > 25500 mutt_addr_is_user: no, all failed. > 25501 mutt_addr_is_user: no, all failed. > 25502 mutt_index_menu[617]: Got op 145 > > > Here's a backtrace when it crashes from replying: > > 0x080cb71f in safe_strdup () > (gdb) backtrace > #0 0x080cb71f in safe_strdup () > #1 0x080b4d6a in rfc822_cpy_adr_real () > #2 0x080bc09c in mutt_default_from () > #3 0x080bc9d0 in ci_send_message () > #4 0x080a20d4 in mutt_pager () > #5 0x0805d753 in mutt_display_message () > #6 0x0806c3c3 in mutt_index_menu () > #7 0x0808c6e5 in main () > (gdb) > > Here's the .muttdebug0 > > 25686 mutt_addr_is_user: no, all failed. > 25687 mutt_addr_is_user: no, all failed. > 25688 send.c:1183: mutt_mktemp returns "/tmp/mutt-smogmonster-ozLk0Waq-7". > 25689 mutt_addr_is_user: no, all failed. > 25690 mutt_addr_is_user: no, all failed. > > - jt
Re: what is the benefit of imap?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 09:06:16AM -0500, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > On Thursday, March 19 at 09:21 AM, quoth Marc Vaillant: > >> Sorry, but I think, here you are wrong. Good IMAP-Clients don’t > >> download the attachments without your interaction (at least you can > >> configure them in such a way). So the reading of the mails should > >> be fast in both ways. But if you wish to open an attachment, IMAP > >> is better than using SSH and local spool. > > > > Is there a way to view the body of an imap message without mutt actually > > fetching (not saving) all attachments? > > Not with mutt. Since mutt was originally designed for viewing a local > mail spool, it has no concept of "partial" messages. Mutt's IMAP > features are really there to simulate a local mail spool, which means > certain features like that would be tough to add (not impossible, but > tough). Ok, understood. > > Depending on your definitions, that may mean that mutt isn't a "good" > IMAP client. It's *reliable*, and it *works*, but it certainly doesn't > take advantage of all the features of IMAP that it theoretically > could. I agree. Support for IMAP in mutt certainly has improved over the years though. Before header-cache, IMAP was basically unusable without something like offlineimap. > > > Fetching a 5-10mb attachment just to view the body text is a > > significant annoyance when I'm away from my local work LAN. I'd like > > to be able to view the body text and have mutt fetch the attachments > > only when I hit "v" -> "return" to view the attachment. > > Suggest the feature to the developers. Better yet, implement it > yourself and submit a patch! Be warned, though: that patch would take > a *lot* of work. I've been a user for over a decade now. I'd love to contribute, I just don't have time right now :( Marc
Re: what is the benefit of imap?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday, March 19 at 09:21 AM, quoth Marc Vaillant: >> Sorry, but I think, here you are wrong. Good IMAP-Clients don’t >> download the attachments without your interaction (at least you can >> configure them in such a way). So the reading of the mails should >> be fast in both ways. But if you wish to open an attachment, IMAP >> is better than using SSH and local spool. > > Is there a way to view the body of an imap message without mutt actually > fetching (not saving) all attachments? Not with mutt. Since mutt was originally designed for viewing a local mail spool, it has no concept of "partial" messages. Mutt's IMAP features are really there to simulate a local mail spool, which means certain features like that would be tough to add (not impossible, but tough). Depending on your definitions, that may mean that mutt isn't a "good" IMAP client. It's *reliable*, and it *works*, but it certainly doesn't take advantage of all the features of IMAP that it theoretically could. > Fetching a 5-10mb attachment just to view the body text is a > significant annoyance when I'm away from my local work LAN. I'd like > to be able to view the body text and have mutt fetch the attachments > only when I hit "v" -> "return" to view the attachment. Suggest the feature to the developers. Better yet, implement it yourself and submit a patch! Be warned, though: that patch would take a *lot* of work. ~Kyle - -- Nothing gives one person so great advantage over another as to remain always cool and unruffled under all circumstances. -- Thomas Jefferson to Francis Eppes, 1816 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iEYEARECAAYFAknCUVcACgkQBkIOoMqOI17vGQCg7UqubNX93Du65UCkES116RkV /BEAoKc3F1P82k4Tc3sEfx71rVyn1rE1 =HlHJ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: what is the benefit of imap?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, March 18 at 09:14 PM, quoth John J. Foster: >On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 04:13:19PM -0500, Kyle Wheeler wrote: >> and IMAP makes it possible for me to sue my own client when I can. > >I'm so glad you're not my lawyer. HA! Whoops, typo. :D ~Kyle - -- To brand a book as unsuitable is an important step toward making it required reading. -- Marvin Kaye -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iEYEARECAAYFAknCTlAACgkQBkIOoMqOI15gFACgwxyACxWCZ8jmiTCXzYMDmKcl cooAn1JRYaNYrp9QRmFPorC+P9LZTXcF =Kjp0 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: what is the benefit of imap?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:23:30AM +0100, Stephan Seitz wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 09:06:14AM +, Chris G wrote: >> Are they on your LAN? Using IMAP across the internet (even with a >> good ADSL connection) can never really be as quick as a local mbox >> spool, especially if you're dealing with attachments and such. Think >> about it - a 1Mbyte attachment is going to take some seconds to pull >> across even a 2 or 3Mb/s ADSL link whereas it's going to be near >> instantanous from a local file. > > Sorry, but I think, here you are wrong. Good IMAP-Clients don’t download > the attachments without your interaction (at least you can configure them > in such a way). So the reading of the mails should be fast in both ways. > But if you wish to open an attachment, IMAP is better than using SSH and > local spool. Is there a way to view the body of an imap message without mutt actually fetching (not saving) all attachments? Fetching a 5-10mb attachment just to view the body text is a significant annoyance when I'm away from my local work LAN. I'd like to be able to view the body text and have mutt fetch the attachments only when I hit "v" -> "return" to view the attachment. > With IMAP you only download the attachment, and then the > local application will deal with it. With SSH and local spool you must > start the application remote. >
Re: what is the benefit of imap?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 12:34:18PM +0100, Rocco Rutte wrote: > Depends. Most people using IMAP use it through IMAP providers which > "guarantee" you 24/7 availability. You mostly have professional admins > who do the work for you and ensure you have access to mail. With local > management, that would be your job. For example, your harddisk with the > mail spool dies and all mail is gone. That is rather unlikely to happen > with say gmail. It depends on your situation. If you only ever check mail from one machine then by all means use pop. Just make sure that one machine has redundancy and a backup policy. Most servers have some kind of backups and if you are the administrator you deal with them, but most mail users don't. If you use multiple computers imap has many benefits. Checking mail from a friends house using webmail? You can still dig up the 2 month old joke and show it to him. You can sift through your sent mail to show him the scathing email you sent some tool on a mailing list. Most people that use pop don't have that ability. If you want the best of both worlds checkout offlineimap. Your mail can be local and you an get all the speed. Yet its still stored on a mail server that presumably someone else is taking care of and has proper backups. Guess what ... if they don't you have an automatic backup and your mail will get pushed back to the server when you can connect again. IMHO IMAP is just more flexible. -- Nick Anderson Network & Systems Administrator PilgrimPage Inc. | Absorbent Ink http://www.pilgrimpage.com | http://www.absorbentprinting.com Office: (785) 842.9164 Desk: (785) 830.6812
Re: questions regarding mutt as newsreader
Hi, * JP Bruns wrote: I am using mutt v1.5.16 with nntp patch (as supplied by gentoo-linux) and have some questions regarding the setup or muttrc-file. First of all, I am not able to post to any newsgroup when the following folder-hook is in effect: folder-hook . 'set record="^"' I only get this error-message: newss://u...@news.motzarella.org:563/spline.test:No such file \ or directory (errno = 2) Disabling that line lets me submit my messages as expected. Is this some kind of a bug or just a "bad-bad-setup"? You don't want that folder-hook with nntp. You can count yourself as lucky that you get the error message. When you're reading a newsgroup and follow up, mutt _should_ store a copy of the outgoing article in exactly that newsgroup, i.e. you'd post twice if it worked. You probably want something like: folder-hook . 'set record="^"' folder-hook ^news 'set record="=articles"' which would store all copies of outgoing articles to $folder/articles mailbox. The second trouble I have is finding a suitable *-hook to define newsserver specific settings. I found some config-files that seem to use or at least list a server-hook, but the manpage does not list such variable, neither does mutt accept it. Simply using a folder-hook (like for an imap-folder) folder-hook 'newss://news.motzarella.org' 'set record="!"' does not seem to work. folder-hook is the right one to use but the order matters. What's the order you tried? You can also try to use the URL from the above error message as that's apparently the folder URL: folder-hook newss://u...@news.motzarella.org:563 ... What nntp patch do you use? (mutt -v should tell you) Rocco
questions regarding mutt as newsreader
Hello, I am using mutt v1.5.16 with nntp patch (as supplied by gentoo-linux) and have some questions regarding the setup or muttrc-file. First of all, I am not able to post to any newsgroup when the following folder-hook is in effect: folder-hook . 'set record="^"' I only get this error-message: newss://u...@news.motzarella.org:563/spline.test:No such file \ or directory (errno = 2) Disabling that line lets me submit my messages as expected. Is this some kind of a bug or just a "bad-bad-setup"? The second trouble I have is finding a suitable *-hook to define newsserver specific settings. I found some config-files that seem to use or at least list a server-hook, but the manpage does not list such variable, neither does mutt accept it. Simply using a folder-hook (like for an imap-folder) folder-hook 'newss://news.motzarella.org' 'set record="!"' does not seem to work. Either my setup is wrong or I have to use a different approach. How would I disable this hook for a newsserver for example? I do not really need to save a message in my INBOX in the future, but saving a message at least for debugging reasons would be nice. Maybe someone can help me out here. Thanks! JP -- Time flies like the wind, but fruit flies like bananas.
Re: what is the benefit of imap?
Hi, * Chris G wrote: On the other hand if you *don't* need to access mail from anywhere then IMAP is slower than other ways of doing it and doesn't add any other particular advantages. Depends. Most people using IMAP use it through IMAP providers which "guarantee" you 24/7 availability. You mostly have professional admins who do the work for you and ensure you have access to mail. With local management, that would be your job. For example, your harddisk with the mail spool dies and all mail is gone. That is rather unlikely to happen with say gmail. Rocco
Re: what is the benefit of imap? Another meta-question.
Hi, * Joost Kremers wrote: so the "leave mail on server" option that most pop-clients have is certainly not a convenient way to access your mail remotely from different locations. Plus: POP needs locking, i.e. only one client at a time can access the mailbox which implies that tools should not perform time-consuming tasks while they have a POP session open. Rocco
Re: what is the benefit of imap?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:32:23AM +0100, Joost Kremers wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 09:06:14AM +, Chris G wrote: > > Are they on your LAN? Using IMAP across the internet (even with a > > good ADSL connection) can never really be as quick as a local mbox > > spool, especially if you're dealing with attachments and such. Think > > about it - a 1Mbyte attachment is going to take some seconds to pull > > across even a 2 or 3Mb/s ADSL link whereas it's going to be near > > instantanous from a local file. > > true, but when i get attachments, i usually save them immediately to my > home dir, which is sync'ed with a usb drive that i carry around (almost) > everywhere i go... certainly the inconvenience of waiting a few secs for an > attachment to download doesn't weigh up to the convenience of accessing my > mail boxes from anywhere i like. > But that wasn't the issue. I quite agree that if you need to access your mail while on the move then IMAP is an easy way of doing it. On the other hand if you *don't* need to access mail from anywhere then IMAP is slower than other ways of doing it and doesn't add any other particular advantages. I.e. IMAP is good for some people but not for other people, it depends on your requirements. -- Chris Green
Re: what is the benefit of imap?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:23:30AM +0100, Stephan Seitz wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 09:06:14AM +, Chris G wrote: >> Are they on your LAN? Using IMAP across the internet (even with a >> good ADSL connection) can never really be as quick as a local mbox >> spool, especially if you're dealing with attachments and such. Think >> about it - a 1Mbyte attachment is going to take some seconds to pull >> across even a 2 or 3Mb/s ADSL link whereas it's going to be near >> instantanous from a local file. > > Sorry, but I think, here you are wrong. Good IMAP-Clients don’t download > the attachments without your interaction (at least you can configure them > in such a way). So the reading of the mails should be fast in both ways. > But if you wish to open an attachment, IMAP is better than using SSH and > local spool. With IMAP you only download the attachment, and then the local > application will deal with it. With SSH and local spool you must start the > application remote. > Er, but I need to download the attachments, otherwise what is the point of having them! :-) OK, I can see a list of messages (relatively) quickly using IMAP but that can hardly be claimed to be reading my E-Mail as fast as when I'm using a local spool. What do you mean "using SSH and local spool"? What I mean by "using a local spool" is exactly that, running the MUA on the system where the mail spool is, i.e. my desktop machine. I'm pretty sure that's what the original person making the comment meant too. -- Chris Green
Re: what is the benefit of imap?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 09:06:14AM +, Chris G wrote: > Are they on your LAN? Using IMAP across the internet (even with a > good ADSL connection) can never really be as quick as a local mbox > spool, especially if you're dealing with attachments and such. Think > about it - a 1Mbyte attachment is going to take some seconds to pull > across even a 2 or 3Mb/s ADSL link whereas it's going to be near > instantanous from a local file. true, but when i get attachments, i usually save them immediately to my home dir, which is sync'ed with a usb drive that i carry around (almost) everywhere i go... certainly the inconvenience of waiting a few secs for an attachment to download doesn't weigh up to the convenience of accessing my mail boxes from anywhere i like. -- Joost Kremers Life has its moments
Re: what is the benefit of imap?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 09:06:14AM +, Chris G wrote: Are they on your LAN? Using IMAP across the internet (even with a good ADSL connection) can never really be as quick as a local mbox spool, especially if you're dealing with attachments and such. Think about it - a 1Mbyte attachment is going to take some seconds to pull across even a 2 or 3Mb/s ADSL link whereas it's going to be near instantanous from a local file. Sorry, but I think, here you are wrong. Good IMAP-Clients don’t download the attachments without your interaction (at least you can configure them in such a way). So the reading of the mails should be fast in both ways. But if you wish to open an attachment, IMAP is better than using SSH and local spool. With IMAP you only download the attachment, and then the local application will deal with it. With SSH and local spool you must start the application remote. Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net | | PGP Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/pgp.html | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: what is the benefit of imap? Another meta-question.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 09:02:12AM +, Chris G wrote: > *By default* in both cases. There's nothing that actually forces you > to leave mail on an IMAP server, neither is there anything that forces > you to remove mail when you download it from a POP3 server. However > most POP3 services expect you to remove mail when you download it and > most IMAP services expect you to keep mail on the server. it's a little more than that. pop was designed with the former in mind, imap with the latter. pop doesn't have the facilities to treat a remote mailbox the same way as a local one. you can leave the mail on the server with pop, but that's about it. it certainly doesn't allow you to store sent mail on the server, or move messages from one mailbox to another on the server. so the "leave mail on server" option that most pop-clients have is certainly not a convenient way to access your mail remotely from different locations. -- Joost Kremers Life has its moments
Re: what is the benefit of imap?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 07:01:14AM +0100, Joost Kremers wrote: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 09:13:34PM +0100, Henrik Enberg wrote: > > The main drawback, and the mainreason I don't use it directly is that > > unless you run a local server with the low latency that gives you, > > it's just too slow. 1 second to display an email is more noticeable > > than you'd think before you try it. > > mmm... i use two imap servers, and both are about as fast as a local mail > box most of the time. to me, the speed difference is too small to really > notice or be a bother. > Are they on your LAN? Using IMAP across the internet (even with a good ADSL connection) can never really be as quick as a local mbox spool, especially if you're dealing with attachments and such. Think about it - a 1Mbyte attachment is going to take some seconds to pull across even a 2 or 3Mb/s ADSL link whereas it's going to be near instantanous from a local file. -- Chris Green
Re: what is the benefit of imap? Another meta-question.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 07:06:12AM +0100, Joost Kremers wrote: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 11:51:56PM -0600, Paul E Condon wrote: > > Another meta-question, where can I find a straight-forward description of > > imap, without the enthusiastic pushing? What is it? > > it's just a protocol to access email on a remote server. that description > would apply to pop3 as well. the difference between them is that imap > leaves the messages on the server, while pop3 downloads them to the local > machine. *By default* in both cases. There's nothing that actually forces you to leave mail on an IMAP server, neither is there anything that forces you to remove mail when you download it from a POP3 server. However most POP3 services expect you to remove mail when you download it and most IMAP services expect you to keep mail on the server. -- Chris Green
