You're running imapd on NT (using something like inetlisn), right?

Is there a reason why you aren't running imapd on UNIX?

Is there a reason why you choose to use the traditional UNIX mailbox
format on NT instead of mbx?  mbx is the default in the NT build.

> 1. The situation on non-NT versions of Windows, where flock() is a
> no-op, should be expected. In this case, the INBOX (Unix format)
> sharing (locking) protections of imapd do not apply and the email
> client is given read-write access on both connections. Since INBOX
> is non-sharable, data integrity is not guaranteed for writes.

Why would you be running an IMAP server on a non-NT version of Windows?
Win95/98/Me are dead, and the corpse has started to stink.  Although I can
understand diehards continuing to run it on the desktop, I can't imagine
why people would use it as a server (particularly an IMAP server!)

> 2. On NT versions of Windows (where flock() is implemented), the
> end results are similar but for a different reason. While Connection
> 1 is open and in IDLE state, Connection 2 is used to 'SELECT INBOX'.
> The response includes 'PERMANENTFLAGS ()' and several indications of
> READ-ONLY state, but the client ignores these and sets the flags
> anyway. Of course, the flags are reset after Connection 2 terminates,
> (since PERMANENTFLAGS was null) as per IMAP specification.

Yes, there is no "kiss of death" feature in the traditional UNIX mailbox
driver for Windows (both NT and non-NT).  The assumption is that anyone
using traditional UNIX format on the PC is doing so as a desktop and not
as a server

> Presumably this does not happen on UNIX as most people (wisely)
> choose to use mbx format and locking is always implemented, making
> the INBOX file fully sharable.

On UNIX, the older session having a traditional UNIX format file is
killed.

> As for support, it is ironic that when the 'unsupported' software
> is *used* correctly, the so-called 'supported' software is where the
> problem lies.

I don't understand what you mean by this.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Reply via email to