Yes, there is a problem.

The locking mechanisms are not the same, and thereby there is no coordinated
locking system between qpopper and uw-imap.

Chris

----- Original Message -----
From: "Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Subscribers of Qpopper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 2:27 AM
Subject: Re: c-client & Qpopper coexist? WAS: Re: Suggestion for a new and
enhanced "server mode"


> By the way ...
> We use qpopper in production and we are happy with it.
> Supplementary we want to reoffer a IMAP service.
> For various reasons we will use the UW IMAP daemon.
> Theoretical a user may access her mailbox at same time
> via qpopper and the UW IMAP daemon.
> Current  we use qpopper 4.0.3.
> Are there any any known problems with regard to file locking ?
>
> - oliver
>
>
>
> > Clifton -
> >
> > Thanks for the reply and for your effort sealing the seams between these
> > two applications.
> >
> > And I apologize for not sending my original message to the list.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Clifton Royston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Christopher Crowley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 4:42 PM
> > Subject: Re: c-client & Qpopper coexist? WAS: Re: Suggestion for a new
and
> > enhanced "server mode"
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 04:34:18PM -0500, Christopher Crowley wrote:
> > > > >   For Qpopper to be able to work as it does now, for systems using
> >
> > just
> >
> > > > > mbox format, but also be able to work as you describe, then its
> >
> > present
> >
> > > > > mailbox I/O would need to be abstracted to a separate mailbox
> >
> > interface
> >
> > > > > I/O layer, somewhat along the lines of the UW-imapd "c-client"
code.
> > > > > (I don't personally like the UW code style, but there are clean
ways
> >
> > to
> >
> > > > > implement the same goal.)
> > > >
> > > > I have a perennial problem because our mail system uses both Qpopper
> > > > and UW-IMAP.  User's mail files become corrupted when they check
with
> > > > both simultaneously.  I have to fix it by hand.
> > >
> > >   I feel your pain.
> > >
> > > > We use mbox format. The drives which house the mail are locally
> > > > attached storage on the mail server.
> > > >
> > > > I think that the last time this was discussed there were some
allusions
> >
> > to a
> >
> > > > possible patch.
> > > >
> > > > Has anyone successfully modified either application to allow it to
use
> >
> > the
> >
> > > > same locking mechanism as the other?
> > >
> > >   I'm running with a patch that does this, and trying to find time to
get
> > > it cleaned up for submission.  It does work in practice, but I am not
> > > sure about the maintainability, and I have to rewrite the low-level
> > > locking routine because I don't think it's portable to anything but a
> > > BSD-style UNIX (uses O_CREAT|O_EXCL|O_EXLOCK on open.)
> > >
> > >   Once it is cleaned up, I will submit it.  I'm sorry for all the
> > > delays.
> > >
> > >   -- Clifton
> > >
> > > --
> > >     Clifton Royston  --  LavaNet Systems Architect --
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > "What do we need to make our world come alive?
> > >    What does it take to make us sing?
> > >  While we're waiting for the next one to arrive..." - Sisters of Mercy
>
> --
> Oliver Egginger
> FH Giessen-Friedberg
> DV-Zentrum
> Wiesenstrasse 14
> 35390 Giessen
> Tel. +49 641 309-1283
> Fax  +49 641 309-2908
> Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> *************************************************************************
> Die aktuellen Sprechzeiten des DV-Zentrums f�r
> E-Mail-Angelegenheiten finden Sie unter:
> http://www.fh-giessen.de/WEB_NADM/dvz/personen.shtml
> *************************************************************************
>

Reply via email to