On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 02:03:33PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
Hi John,
> I have looked over the log and, looking at that first date you reported, I
> see it was in the INBOX.mls to start with with UID 79603. Later, it also
> appeared with UID 79608. But OfflineIMAP had not ever called APPEND
On Thu July 19 2007 12:01:18 pm Sven Hoexter wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 04:27:08PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > Try offlineimap -1 -d imap or -1 -d maildir.
> >
> > The other change that was made was switching to Python's stock
> > imaplib.py, which may have contributed.
> >
> > I haven't s
On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 12:58:14AM -0700, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
Hi Asheesh,
> Sven, is that what it seems to you, too?
Yes.
> Maybe we can try looking at a
> diff of the last 4.x to the first 5.x.
I guess that I'll do something like this when I've some more free time in
about two weeks.
Cheers
John, it sounds like my patch was a red herring. That makes sense to me
because I can't think of anything wrong with my beautiful change. (-;
Sven, is that what it seems to you, too? Maybe we can try looking at a
diff of the last 4.x to the first 5.x.
-- Asheesh.
--
Kleeneness is next to G
On Wed July 18 2007 3:57:05 pm Sven Hoexter wrote:
> Hi,
> the problem has been introduced with the 5.x version so maybe there is a
> way to get complete debug log with every step that offline imap does where
> it might be possible to see why it thinks that some messages are still new
> and need to
Hi,
the problem has been introduced with the 5.x version so maybe there is a
way to get complete debug log with every step that offline imap does where
it might be possible to see why it thinks that some messages are still new
and need to be fetched?
I'll try my best to narrow something down in the
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 03:39:13PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Tue July 17 2007 3:20:19 pm Sven Hoexter wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 02:17:20PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
Moin,
> > > I am suspicious of one particular patch here. I think this is the only
> > > code path involved that ha
On Tue July 17 2007 3:20:19 pm Sven Hoexter wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 02:17:20PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> > I am suspicious of one particular patch here. I think this is the only
> > code path involved that has been modified recently.
> >
> > Can you try applying this to
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 02:17:20PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
Hi John,
> I am suspicious of one particular patch here. I think this is the only code
> path involved that has been modified recently.
>
> Can you try applying this to the OfflineIMAP tree with patch -p1 -R and see
> if it helps t
Hi Sven,
I am suspicious of one particular patch here. I think this is the only code
path involved that has been modified recently.
Can you try applying this to the OfflineIMAP tree with patch -p1 -R and see
if it helps things for you?
I haven't seen this myself so your assistance tracking it
Package: offlineimap
Version: 5.99.1
Severity: important
Hi,
I'm using offlineimap to checkout mails from a courier imap server with ssl
and read my mails on the local system with mutt.
Since the last update of offline imap I've constantly doublicated mails
in my various mailboxes. I think that's
11 matches
Mail list logo
