> Od: Bron Gondwana <br...@fastmail.fm> > Komu: <dovecot@dovecot.org> > Dátum: 17.10.2013 12:30 > Predmet: Re: [Dovecot] Strange output from LIST command > > CC: "Timo Sirainen" <t...@iki.fi> >On Thu, Oct 17, 2013, at 09:21 PM, azurIt wrote: >> ______________________________________________________________ >> > Od: Bron Gondwana <br...@fastmail.fm> >> > Komu: Michael M Slusarz <slus...@curecanti.org>, <dovecot@dovecot.org> >> > Dátum: 17.10.2013 12:14 >> > Predmet: Re: [Dovecot] Strange output from LIST command >> > >> >On Tue, Oct 15, 2013, at 06:23 AM, Michael M Slusarz wrote: >> >> Quoting azurIt <azu...@pobox.sk>: >> >> >> >> > i'm using Dovecot 2.1.7 (Debian Wheezy) and output from LIST command >> >> > looks strange: >> >> > >> >> > C: 4 LIST () "" (INBOX INBOX.Karantena INBOX.Spam) RETURN (STATUS >> >> > (UNSEEN)) >> >> > S: * LIST () "." "INBOX" >> >> > S: * LIST () "." "INBOX.Karantena" >> >> > S: * STATUS "INBOX.Karantena" (UNSEEN 0) >> >> > S: * LIST () "." "INBOX.Spam" >> >> > S: * STATUS "INBOX.Spam" (UNSEEN 0) >> >> > S: 4 OK List completed. >> >> > >> >> > The UNSEEN information for INBOX is completely missing. It is >> >> > correct behavior? >> >> >> >> No. RFC 5819 [2]: >> >> >> >> "For each selectable mailbox matching the list pattern and selection >> >> options, the server MUST return an untagged LIST response followed by >> >> an untagged STATUS response containing the information requested in >> >> the STATUS return option." >> > >> >Just wondering if the INBOX was SELECTed at the time? There's some fun >> >interaction around STATUS and SELECT in RFC3501. >> > >> >Bron. >> >> >> Here's the complete IMAP communication, see the (1) only: >> http://bugs.horde.org/view.php?actionID=view_file&type=log&file=imap-ok.log&ticket=12748 >> >> I also find out that it's working ok when i LIST the INBOX alone like this: >> C: 4 LIST () "" (INBOX) RETURN (STATUS (UNSEEN)) >> S: * LIST () "." "INBOX" >> S: * STATUS "INBOX" (UNSEEN 2) >> S: 4 OK List completed. >> >> The information about UNSEEN messages is correct. It's only doing problems >> when listing multiple folders at once. > >Yeah, that definitely looks like a bug! I've CC'd Timo to grab his attention >:)
Can anyone confirm the bug? Will it be fixed in 2.1.x? Thank you. azur
