On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 14:49 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 07:01:43PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
> Thanks. That's clear now. Except for the unexpunged situation :
>
> when excactly does dovecot notice that a (restored) message reappears ?
>
> You said the message is re
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 07:01:43PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
Thanks. That's clear now. Except for the unexpunged situation :
when excactly does dovecot notice that a (restored) message reappears ?
You said the message is removed from the index but not (because of lazy
expunge) yet from doveco
On Sep 9, 2008, at 6:56 PM, Thomas Hummel wrote:
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 06:41:34PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 17:35 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
Can this new mail be named identically, i.e.
1215166123.52887_0.host.dom.ain:2, ?
if so, it would be a problem when merging
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 06:41:34PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 17:35 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
>
> > Can this new mail be named identically, i.e.
> > 1215166123.52887_0.host.dom.ain:2, ?
> > if so, it would be a problem when merging.
>
> Yes, except for Dovecot's potent
On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 17:35 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> Can this new mail be named identically, i.e.
> 1215166123.52887_0.host.dom.ain:2, ?
> if so, it would be a problem when merging.
Yes, except for Dovecot's potential warning:
> > Dovecot doesn't really like if messages get "unexpunged"
>
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 05:54:17PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> I'm not really sure what you're asking. The file names are unique and
let's say someone has a message named
1215166123.52887_0.host.dom.ain:2,
in his mailbox. That he accidentally deletes this mailbox (but it has been
backed up
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Timo Sirainen said the following on 09/09/08 16:54:
> Safest would be to create "restored mails" mailbox and put everything
> there and let the user figure out how to merge things. Might be annoying
> enough to merge them so that they'll learn not to
On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 14:16 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote:
> Assuming someone has got a foobar/[cur|new|tmp] maildir, loses for some reason
> its content and that some new mail (seen and/or unseen) comes into that
> mailbox
> inbetween (that is before the restore procedure takes place, thus creating
Hello,
I would like to know what is the proper way to restore a Maildir :
Assuming someone has got a foobar/[cur|new|tmp] maildir, loses for some reason
its content and that some new mail (seen and/or unseen) comes into that mailbox
inbetween (that is before the restore procedure takes place, thu
