Hey Wietse. On Fri, 2012-10-26 at 22:33 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: > Postfix implements traditional UNIX mbox format and locks. Yeah clear...
> Theoretically it is possible to add a support bazillion variants. Well... I only know about 4 variants, of which only one is really broken (mboxo). > Unfortunatelt, there are no guarantees that all programs will adhere > to the same mbox variant. Sure, but anyway... > Worse, all mbox formats change some of > the messages upon delivery, and therefore invalidate digital > signatures. The format that makes fewer changes is therefore > preferable. ... what we use now, is IMHO the worst choice of all, it breaks signatures (always when a client expects another mbox sub-format AND when From_ lines appear in the mail) and even doesn't give one the chance to recover manually from that. I'd agree that mboxcl2 is not suited for postfix, cause when a client doesn't expect it, one will get huge corruptions and "phantom messages". mboxcl (v1) doesn't make much sense,.. IMHO. But mboxrd has just benefits. You may also find broken signatures, when clients don't expect it, but as far as I can see: not more or less than with mboxo!! And unlike mboxo you can: a) recover the original maik b) and move convert to maildir, when you note that you had corruptions. c) when your client understands mboxrd... it works just without problems. So... what exactly speaks against switching to it? :) If it's just the time needed to write a patch, I'd guess it should be very simple and could try to make one. > If you want hard guarantees, use maildir. Of course,.. but maildir also has its drawbacks and may not always be a feasible alternative. Cheers, Chris.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
