Re: [Dovecot] FETCH for mailbox mailboxname UID #1 got too little data: #2 vs #3

2008-10-05 Thread Timo Sirainen
On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 22:35 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote: I got it with multiple imaptest instances even with current dovecot-1.1 hg tree. I checked the emails with that UIDs and they are actually truncated. Some things I noted on these mails: - they are all with MIME multipart

Re: [Dovecot] FETCH for mailbox mailboxname UID #1 got too little data: #2 vs #3

2008-10-05 Thread Timo Sirainen
On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 15:27 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote: On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 22:35 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote: I got it with multiple imaptest instances even with current dovecot-1.1 hg tree. I checked the emails with that UIDs and they are actually truncated. Some things I noted

Re: [Dovecot] FETCH for mailbox mailboxname UID #1 got too little data: #2 vs #3

2008-10-05 Thread Diego Liziero
On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Timo Sirainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 15:27 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote: On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 22:35 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote: I got it with multiple imaptest instances even with current dovecot-1.1 hg tree. I checked the emails

Re: [Dovecot] FETCH for mailbox mailboxname UID #1 got too little data: #2 vs #3

2008-10-05 Thread Diego Liziero
On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 6:34 PM, Diego Liziero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Timo Sirainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 15:27 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote: On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 22:35 +0200, Diego Liziero wrote: I got it with multiple imaptest

[Dovecot] FETCH for mailbox mailboxname UID #1 got too little data: #2 vs #3

2008-09-24 Thread Diego Liziero
I got it with multiple imaptest instances even with current dovecot-1.1 hg tree. I checked the emails with that UIDs and they are actually truncated. Some things I noted on these mails: - they are all with MIME multipart attachments. - the last multipart attachment is truncated - the truncated