Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

Chris Green wrote: > Currently I run mutt on a remote server where I have to use maildir > because their file systems are mounted noatime. I am moving to reading > mail on my own Linux box just because I want to get back to mbox, [...] For what it's worth, setting 'check_mbox_size = yes' is usuall

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

On 2009-04-27, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> Who's "we"? Are you volunteering to fix all of the MUAs and >> MTAs out there that have mbox code in them that do follow the >> rules to make them compatible with _one_ broken library >> module? > > All the MUAs and MTAs I'm aware of that are worth bo

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

On 2009-04-27, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message , Aahz wrote: > >> In article , >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >>> >>>It's only in the proprietary-software world that we need to worry about >>>backward compatibility with old, obsolete software that the vendors >>>cannot or will not fix. In

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message , Grant > Edwards wrote: > > > On 2009-04-26, Lawrence D'Oliveiro > > wrote: > > > >> In message <_vqdnf6pny1gymzunz2dnuvz_qcdn...@posted.visi>, Grant Edwards > >> wrote: > >> > >>> ... if one didn't care about backwards-compatiblity with old e-mail > >>>

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

In message , Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:19:51 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> Either there are enough people using it to care about it, in which case >> somebody in the community will fix it, it or there are not, in which >> case it's not worth bothering with. > > Th

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:19:51 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message , Aahz wrote: > >> In article , Lawrence D'Oliveiro >> wrote: >>> >>>It's only in the proprietary-software world that we need to worry about >>>backward compatibility with old, obsolete software that the vendors >>>cann

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

In message , Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2009-04-26, Lawrence D'Oliveiro > wrote: > >> In message <_vqdnf6pny1gymzunz2dnuvz_qcdn...@posted.visi>, Grant Edwards >> wrote: >> >>> ... if one didn't care about backwards-compatiblity with old e-mail >>> apps, then one would use a less broken mailbox fo

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

In message , Aahz wrote: > In article , > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> >>It's only in the proprietary-software world that we need to worry about >>backward compatibility with old, obsolete software that the vendors >>cannot or will not fix. In the Free Software world, we fix the software >>to b

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

In article , Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >It's only in the proprietary-software world that we need to worry about >backward compatibility with old, obsolete software that the vendors >cannot or will not fix. In the Free Software world, we fix the software >to bring it up to date. Are you volunt

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

On 2009-04-26, tinn...@isbd.co.uk wrote: > Grant Edwards wrote: >> > I suppose I could do the following:- >> > >> > lock the mbox >> > get the atime >> > add the new message with mailbox.mbox.add() >> > restore the atime >> > unlock the mbox >> >> You could fix mbox.add(). ;

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

On 2009-04-26, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message <_vqdnf6pny1gymzunz2dnuvz_qcdn...@posted.visi>, Grant Edwards > wrote: > >> ... if one didn't care about backwards-compatiblity with old e-mail >> apps, then one would use a less broken mailbox format like >> maildir. > > It's only in the pro

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

Grant Edwards wrote: > > I suppose I could do the following:- > > > > lock the mbox > > get the atime > > add the new message with mailbox.mbox.add() > > restore the atime > > unlock the mbox > > You could fix mbox.add(). ;) > Yes, but I'm not sure that I'm that competant!

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message <49f33d8d$0$516$bed64...@news.gradwell.net>, tinn...@isbd.co.uk > wrote: > > > mbox has several advantages over maildir (for me anyway):- > > > > It allows easy removal of empty mailboxes (in my case by the MUA) > > Really? I just created a "junk" ma

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

In message <_vqdnf6pny1gymzunz2dnuvz_qcdn...@posted.visi>, Grant Edwards wrote: > ... if one didn't care about backwards-compatiblity with old e-mail > apps, then one would use a less broken mailbox format like > maildir. It's only in the proprietary-software world that we need to worry about b

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

In message <49f33d8d$0$516$bed64...@news.gradwell.net>, tinn...@isbd.co.uk wrote: > mbox has several advantages over maildir (for me anyway):- > > It allows easy removal of empty mailboxes (in my case by the MUA) Really? I just created a "junk" mail folder via my IMAP server using Thunderb

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

tinn...@isbd.co.uk wrote: Grant Edwards wrote: On 2009-04-24, Grant Edwards wrote: Anybody writing to an mbox mailbox has to follow the rules if they expect to interoperate with other mail applications. If mailbox.mbox.add() doesn't preserve the atime when writing to an mbox, then mailbox.m

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

On 2009-04-25, tinn...@isbd.co.uk wrote: > Grant Edwards wrote: >> On 2009-04-24, Grant Edwards wrote: >> >> > Anybody writing to an mbox mailbox has to follow the rules if >> > they expect to interoperate with other mail applications. If >> > mailbox.mbox.add() doesn't preserve the atime when

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2009-04-24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > > In message , Grant Edwards > > wrote: > > > >> AFAIK, atime >> when an mbox contains new mail for at least 20 years. > > > > Doesn't apply to maildir though, does it? > > Nope. With maildir, there's a completely separate dire

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2009-04-24, Grant Edwards wrote: > > > Anybody writing to an mbox mailbox has to follow the rules if > > they expect to interoperate with other mail applications. If > > mailbox.mbox.add() doesn't preserve the atime when writing to > > an mbox, then mailbox.mbox.add is

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

MRAB wrote: > tinn...@isbd.co.uk wrote: > > It seems to me that mailbox.mbox.add() sets the access time of a mbox > > file as well as the modification time. This is not good for MUAs that > > detect new mail by looking to see if the access time is before the > > modification time. > > > > Have I

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

On 2009-04-24, Grant Edwards wrote: > Anybody writing to an mbox mailbox has to follow the rules if > they expect to interoperate with other mail applications. If > mailbox.mbox.add() doesn't preserve the atime when writing to > an mbox, then mailbox.mbox.add is broken. I should qualify that: s

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

On 2009-04-24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In message , Grant Edwards > wrote: > >> AFAIK, atime> when an mbox contains new mail for at least 20 years. > > Doesn't apply to maildir though, does it? Nope. With maildir, there's a completely separate directory where one puts new messages. > Upda

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

On 2009-04-24, MRAB wrote: >>> [snip] >>> The access time is the time it was last accessed, ie read or modified. >> >> Usually. >> >>> The modification time is the time it was last modified. >> >> Usually. >> >>> The access time can never be before the modification time because it >>> must be

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

In message , Grant Edwards wrote: > AFAIK, atime contains new mail for at least 20 years. Doesn't apply to maildir though, does it? Updating atime adds a lot of filesystem overhead; that's why the relatime option was invented . But better still is not to bothe

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

Grant Edwards wrote: On 2009-04-23, MRAB wrote: tinn...@isbd.co.uk wrote: It seems to me that mailbox.mbox.add() sets the access time of a mbox file as well as the modification time. This is not good for MUAs that detect new mail by looking to see if the access time is before the modification

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

On 2009-04-23, MRAB wrote: > tinn...@isbd.co.uk wrote: >> It seems to me that mailbox.mbox.add() sets the access time of a mbox >> file as well as the modification time. This is not good for MUAs that >> detect new mail by looking to see if the access time is before the >> modification time. >>

Re: mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

tinn...@isbd.co.uk wrote: It seems to me that mailbox.mbox.add() sets the access time of a mbox file as well as the modification time. This is not good for MUAs that detect new mail by looking to see if the access time is before the modification time. Have I done something wrong somewhere or is

mailbox.mbox.add() sets access time as well as modification time

It seems to me that mailbox.mbox.add() sets the access time of a mbox file as well as the modification time. This is not good for MUAs that detect new mail by looking to see if the access time is before the modification time. Have I done something wrong somewhere or is mailbox.mbox.add() really a