--On Tuesday, October 29, 2002 2:48 PM +0000 Nigel Metheringham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not very compressible - too little plaintext to let > algorithms loose on plus compressing smaller than basic block size gains > nothing. Are you sure? Or is that only when compressing individual messages? It seems to me that if one first tar's a mailbox and the gzips it, the tarball will have many messages with repeated strings (eg. header lines) and so be just as compressable as a single mbox file. I'd also like to point out mbx format, the format promoted by the UW-IMAP people. It's a many-messages-per-file format but it's designed for update. As it's a binary format, it can't be easily hand-edited, and the use of c-client library functions for maintenance is preferred. (I'm still using mbox, so this is my regurgitation of what I remember from a visit to the UW-IMAP site.) _______________________________________________ evolution maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution
