Re: [bug-mailutils] email fixed, and IMAP fixed?

[Sergey Poznyakoff]

Hi Gary,

Nice to have some news from you.

> I'm sorry about the above error.  I had to recompile nmh, and study the
> source code for Exim version 3.36 to put in the correct line in the
> exim configuration file, to fix the error.  It should be coming through
> OK now with "From: address@hidden".

It does, indeed. Thank you.

> > server 0.0.0.0:143 {
> >   transcript yes;
> > }
> 
> I tried putting exactly what you have above into the file
> 
> "/usr/local/etc/mailutils.rc"

No, that's wrong. They should go into imap4d section of the above
file.

> program imap4d server 0.0.0.0:143 {
>   transcript yes;
> }

Almost, but not quite so:) The correct syntax is:

program imap4d {
  server 0.0.0.0:143 {
    transcript yes;
  }
}

The `program' statement is a block statement, therefore it requires
curly braces.

> > sending the "Noselect" switch along with it, which I suspect is why the mail
> > program displays them as grayed-out.
[...]
> It turns out that my suspicion above regarding the "NoSelect" switch
> was correct. 

Ah, that does shed some light on it.

> The code that checks for mbox
> format is in libproto/mbox/folder.c.  When this code is called to check
> what really is an mh format subdirectory, lines 93-95 incorrectly identify
> it as an mbox subdirectory.

Good catch! It does, indeed.

> [The #if block] forces the mbox URL check to fail for any folder
> or subdirectory, thereby allowing the next record to run, which allows the
> mh record to correctly identify this as an mh subdirectory.  With the above
> change, imap4d did correctly see all of my mh mail, and I am now able to
> access this mail using both Linux and Microsoft Windows email programs,
> which was my objective from the beginning.

Great.

> Did I make any mistakes in any of the above?

I'd say you did not. Your reasoning was quite correct. But it appears
there was a simpler method to achieve that, which would not require
changing the code: it is to set your default mailbox type to mh, like
that:

  mailbox {
    mailbox-type "mh";
  }

Have you tried this? If not, could you try?
  
> In stopping lines 93-95 above from being compiled, have I made imap4d
> work for my purposes, while introducing some other problem that I
> simply have not stumbled onto yet?

Generally speaking, yes. This will introduce problems when working with
plain UNIX mailboxes. But I think I should try to find better ways of
autodetection of mbox vs. mh formats. Thanks for bringing this to my
attention.

Regards,
Sergey