[could you please set your word wrap? thanks]
On Sat, 13 Jul 2002 04:02:37 -0500 Sebastian Thomschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ST> The IMAP server is imap.web.de, the e-mail webinterface is accessible
ST> via freemail.web.de. I don't have a clue which mail server they are
ST> running.
Me neither -- it identifies itself as IMAP4-Server which is awfully
informative. Anyhow, I've found reports about this on Google (you can look
at them as well searching for "imap server search unseen "web.de""), here
is one from an authority:
[fetchmail]IMAP -- search unseen
Eric S. Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tue, 29 May 2001 22:38:00 -0400
Previous message: [fetchmail]IMAP -- search unseen
Next message: [fetchmail][fetchmail-announce] The 5.8.5 release of fetchmail is
available
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Teichgraeber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> How do you think about solving this problem: Should there be a support
> in `fetchmail' for this kind of IMAP servers, so that fetchmail would
> try to use the old detection method if a `SEARCH UNSEEN' has failed --
> or should the mail service provider be encouraged to use a more
> current (or complete) IMAP-Server, or do you see another possibility?
SEARCH UNSEEN has been part of the IMAP standard since IMAP2, RFC 1176.
A server that does not implement it has not implemented IMAP and is
broken. End of discussion.
--
<a href="http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they
are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America
cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the people are armed,
and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.
-- Noah Webster
I tend to agree with ESR for once, the server is *really* broken, it's not
that it doesn't implement some SEARCH options, but it doesn't implement
SEARCH _at_all_ which is quite unbelievable for something calling itself an
IMAP server.
ST> Maybe a solution would be to have an option to suppress at least the
ST> popup box that appears when this error occurs.
The real question is how to detect the unread messages, not how to deal
with the error. You could enter a bug report about this and I may try to
add an option to disable checking for unread messages completely later but,
honestly, you'd better complain to web.de about this because such behaviour
is unacceptable.
Regards,
VZ
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Mahogany-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mahogany-users
