On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Mitch \(WebCob\) wrote: > Because once the copy is complete, there are TWO different messages which > each could be opened and edited and saved independantly I think... > > With hardlinks there would only be one... which would be more of a "clone" > then a "copy" ;-)
If one accesses one's mailbox messages individually through IMAP only, then this is not a problem, I think. What IMAP operations alter the /content/ of messages? Clearly, I could run an MUA or some other program and muck up invidual messages, but I am specifically concerned here with IMAP-only access. I have an (ugly) patch which does use hardlinks to make COPY operations faster, but like I said, it's ugly. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jon > Nelson > Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 11:35 AM > To: Courier-Users > Subject: [courier-users] Question about COPY operation > > > Is there any reason why using hardlinks to accomplish the COPY operation > is not feasible? IMAP never futzes with the /content/ of messages, only > the /filename/, right? -- Applying computer technology is simply finding the right wrench to pound in the correct screw. Jon Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> C and Python Code Gardener ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Does your code think in ink? You could win a Tablet PC. Get a free Tablet PC hat just for playing. What are you waiting for? http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?micr5043en _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
