Hi Andy, > You will probably find interest in reading the following thread:
Oh yes, I do :) > Sam of Courier-IMAP claimed that OpenBSD's random pid assignment broke > qmail and Courier-IMAP. It certainly broke Courier-IMAP. IMHO, it broke qmail, too. From the maildir definition: "Old-fashioned delivery identifiers use the following formats: * n, where n is the process ID, and where this process has been forked to make one delivery. Unfortunately, some foolish operating systems repeat process IDs quickly, breaking the standard time+pid combination." Replace "some foolish operating systems" with (at least) OpenBSD, and you've got it. Anyway, qmail itself still uses <unixtime>.<pid>.<hostname> as the identifier when writing no mails, thus it gets as mousetrapped as Courier IMAP itself, doesn't it? However, that's not your part of the story. Here's my idea: If moving a message from one Maildir to another Maildir, and if you have to create the message in "new" instead of "cur" there, doesn't it behave like a completely now delivery to that Maildir? If it does - aren't you free to change not only the info part from the filename, but also the uniq part? If it's a new delivery, you're the delivery agent, and it's your duty to find a good identifier. That way, you'd be able to introduce "more unique" identifiers, such as microseconds (but who guarantees OpenBSD wouldn't repeat the same PID within a single microsecond?) or the unix_sequencenumber() mentioned on the Maildir definition, which would eliminate the need to wait a second before moving from "new" to "cur". Jonas
