Howdy all,
After putting my SASL patches into some more widespread use, I found
a few bugs with them. As a result, I've updated the patch. You can
get it at:
ftp://ftp.cmf.nrl.navy.mil/pub/kenh/nmh-sasl-patch-1.0.4-v2
I've included a MIME pointer to the patch below. Comments welcome.
Doug
I've included a MIME pointer to the patch below. Comments welcome.
Doug has fixed my subscription to the list, so you can feel free to
reply to the list with comments.
What was wrong, out of curiosity?
Let's see
Well, I didn't realize that whatnow parsed switches for send, so
I had to
The last time I remember IMAP support coming up was quite awhile ago, and
the commentary (from Richard Coleman??) was that IMAP support probably
wouldn't be forthcoming because IMAP would probably spell the eventual death
of [n]mh. I don't recall a lot of posts disagreeing with that view, though
Then there's the question of a "session": doesn't IMAP have the idea
of "logging on" or "connecting" to an IMAP store for some period of
time, and preserving the state of that session while the user is
logged on?
"Not really". You can have multiple simultaneous connections, and
your clients
IMO, it's rare because people these days don't think of being able to
do it; they're used to GUI mail front-ends that don't allow (?) this
kind of thing.
Use an IMAP client recently? "Shared" mailboxes are already part of
the IMAP specification. Most reasonable ones deal with them just
fine.
See the APPEND IMAP4rev1 command:
append: http://andrew2.andrew.cmu.edu/rfc/rfc1730.html#sec-6.3.10.
Yeah, I had look at this, but it really doesn't work - you can't
_replace_ an old message, you can only add a new one to a folder. You
can set a system-defined flag called \Answer that
What provision in RFC 2060 treats flags as a scarce resource? I missed that
in my reading.
It might just be my reading of the specification - there is a fair amount
of text regarding the limits w.r.t. permanent flags.
I know of no IMAP server in common use which does not support arbitrary
That's how it should treat those messages.
(Whether or not it takes them as GMT and converts it to local or simply
treats it as local is another discussion - I'm not sure which one is
right).
I fail to see the distinction between the two discussions, but oh well
(we're storing the date as an
It doesn't seem like nmh development has really progressed lately; I am
having a hard time finding commits later than March 17th of this year.
I'm wondering if Dan the gang are still doing work on nmh; if not, then
would they be interested in having someone else run the show for a while?
I'd be
How's SourceForge doing these days? VA Software isn't in the best shape
now, I hear. I've been trying to find a big chunk of time to move the
online MH book to SourceForge, but now I'm wondering if I might move it
there and the server would go away. Comments, anyone?
Make a backup.
--Ken
No, I agree there hasn't been much work. I think the major sticking
issue for a 1.0.5 was that Dan was not happy with the new date parsing
code. The new code was a bit faster and actually compiled. The old
parser was some crufty code that was being munged with sed in order to
compile.
I would suggest Sourceforge not be used for a variety of reasons;
First being the fact that it is a sinking ship. If people feel a
Sourceforge-like site is really needed it would make more sense
to me to use savannah.gnu.org which is now open to non-GNU
projects.
What is wrong with mhost.com
I'm not sure that I agree. When I asked people on this list about making
changes to the CVS, I was told to post my changes and someone would look
'em over and put them into the CVS. I couldn't find anybody to give me
CVS write access since the maintainer was too busy. So let's not just toss
Okay, my reading of the rough consensus of the messages I've seen is,
Yes, do something, dammit. Here's what I think we should do:
- We should wait for Dan to say something. I just checked my exmh address
book, and the last message I ever saw from Dan was July 31st. So I'm
not even sure
I'd say it still only warrants a 1.1. There are insufficient new
features added or changed functionality. Leave 2.0 for a major
rewrite.
Are you sure? Have you looked at the changes? There was a whole lot
of cleaning up that was done, and I don't think the security stuff was
insignificant
nmh-1.0.4 doesn't support content-disposition header.
so, mhstore command cannot respect filename=
looking at cvsweb, I found supporting content-disposition is
one of todo items for mh* commands in nmh/doc/TODO.
any progress on nmh-1.0.4+dev?
No. I can't access the CVS server, so I'm
A lot, but there's a refusal to kick the ball into the goal. There have been
many significant bug fixes over the last couple of years, but the maintainers
don't seem willing to issue a new release to the outside world
(UNFORTUNATELY!).
Well, it seems like the last maintainer vanished, and I
Who has usually rolled releases in the past? Was that Dan? I've heard
that there was a lot of unreleased changes in the CVS. But, I'm sure we
can work through this and get another release out there.
Yes, that was Dan, but he seems to be gone now.
I think I've used up my energy trying to get
If I remember correctly, wasn't there still some problems remaining with
the the code in CVS? I thought I remember some problems with date
processing.
IMHO, the only problem was with Dan's perception of the date processing.
I thought the changes were fine.
If so, I would suggest rolling back
Back around December people got all excited talking about a new
release, rolling in patches that are floating around, and taking
care of issues in the TODO file, but I have not seen any
progress on that front. Until people start to do some real work,
moving the repository so that it can just
I tried. The basic problem was simple: Doug and I couldn't get
me working repository access. There was simply some
strangeness between our versions of OpenSSH that made it not
work, no matter how much we tried.
What version were you running? I see that mononoke.mhost.com is
running
I've already got it (thanks to Doug Morris for putting it up today!)
Now what?
ell, _since_ you asked ... I've already submitted it for a project n
savannah.gnu.org. By that, I mean that I've created a developer's
account for myself and gone through the registration process to host a
new
Just wanted to give everyone a quick status update.
I've been working with the savannah folks on the nmh collection; however,
one sticking point is that the copyright pedigree of nmh is not clear.
Currently, the copyright of nmh is assigned to The Authors of nmh and
that's a little fuzzy (also,
Their concern was that they couldn't determine to their satisfaction that
nmh was free software. I am trying to work with them on the issue, but
I haven't heard back from them in a little while. However, if you (or
anyone) wants to talk with them directly, please do. You could find out
Might as well give that to you in this post rather than sending you an
additional email, Ken. My account name is Dan_Harkless.
You should be able to have write access now. Just FYI, the current
list of developers is now:
Ken Hornstein
Scott Lipcon
Michael Richardson
Dan Harkless
Anders
Hey guys a word.
Yes, I've been tied up with Real Work(tm), but here's what's happening in
a very short order:
- I've created the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED],
and it should be in place in less than two hours from now (so the
email from Savannah tells me). I'm finishing up the stuff
I just noticed that the CVS site has the excellent additions in
popsbr.c for SASL authentication.
Don't forget mts/smtp/smtp.c as well :-) (Sigh, I need to get encryption
done for it ... so much code ...)
--Ken
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
start doing release canidates next week. Only bug fixes for 1.1,
I vote for the linux-kernel strategy of using odd releases for unstable
and even releases for stable versions.
I hope I don't come across wrong when I say that my preferred versioning
scheme is both odd
Do we have a notion if we are using autoconf2.13, or autoconf2.5?
Just FYI, we're (going to be) using autoconf 2.52 (unless something newer
comes out, or has come out already).
--Ken
This file is now marked as deleted on the head.
I now get:
creating config.h
cat: ./config.h.in: No such file or directory
Is it supposed to be created somehow?
By running autoheader (same as configure; you create that by running autoconf)
--Ken
This is a good point. I wonder if Tobias' feature belongs in a future
release of nmh, where we'd have time to discuss things like the
fascinating question Earl brought up: what about IMAP? I had a few
major questions and concerns in my own long reply. There's a lot that
nmh needs to do to
Well, I did:
make distclean
autoconf
./configure
make
Errr ... you didn't run autoheader, as far as I can tell.
--Ken
Shouldn't this be 1.5? Otherwise, you'll get folks confused. I seem to
recall that the last official nmh release was 1.4
Last release was 1.0.4, not 1.4. So I think 1.1 is right.
--Ken
I was wondering if you could list the features and new features (or
reintegrated ones)
of the 1.1 RC please
In short:
- A bunch of new shit
- A bunch of bug fixes
But seriously ... that's a good question. I haven't had time to come up
with a set of release notes. The one new feature I know
I had hoped to see APOP in this list among other things
Well ... shoot. I was under the impression that APOP is on it's way out
to be replaced by the CRAM-MD5 mechanism that SASL uses. But I just
checked, and it seems like you can enable APOP already with --enable-apop.
So that's a non-issue,
Something I need to put in is having inc delete messages after X many
have been downloaded. That way I can survive a net outages or ^C easier.
You mean via POP? It deletes each message right after it retrieves it,
AFAIK. I think that problem is that according to the POP3 spec, unless you
get
Ken You mean via POP? It deletes each message right after it retrieves
Ken it,
Ken AFAIK. I think that problem is that according to the POP3 spec,
Ken unless you
Ken get a clean QUIT, you don't make any changes to the mailbox.
Hmm. That's probably what I experience.
There is one other problem with getting nmh to work over IMAP. The
IMAP daemon's themselves must understand the MH format. I believe UW
has mh support as a legacy, but I haven't spent enough time to get
my own use of it working. Any feedback on IMAP daemons that work with
the MH format.
...
Chris Garrigues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More recently, the strategy that applications have used to implement (b) is to
embed a language such as tcl instead.
The day that happens to MH/nmh will be the day that I switch to
using mutt.
Since the intersection of people with cool ideas and people
I just started integrating some of my stuff. I noticed that the cvs does
not come with a configure file. I tried to use the one from nmh-1.0.4 but
it doesn't work because it doesn't know anything about SASL_INCLUDES.
Anyone know how to get this stuff built? Thanks.
If you're building from
ps: I have absolutely no idea if there will ever be a new nmh release, or
if anyone really still cares (and is able) to make cvs commits, I know I
can't.
So development of NMH is dead, then?
Well ... I've been unfortunately busy in my real life job. Buuuttt ...
Everyone who has asked me for
It's always bugged me that MH/nmh starts to install a new user setup if
I guess that I wasn't being brave enough to suggest changing the way that
things worked. I'll give it a few days to settle out, and then make the
above change if no major objections arise.
No objection from me.
--Ken
Is there any reason that 1.1-RC1 hasn't been promoted to a real 1.1?
Mostly, because I'm a lame-ass.
soon. I promise. There have been a few bugs (and patches) posted.
Every time I get a new Redhat installation, I need to update inc 1.0.4
because it doesn't properly handle POP passwords
Are you still sheparding this project? I remembered to look at
Rather poorly, but yes (well, I just got back from a two week vacation in
Europe).
http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/nmh
I noticed that there are outstanding bugs - I haven't had a chance to look
at the reports. Do you need
Hi. Seems like we've had a 1.1 release candidate sitting for a long
time. Can we make it a release yet? It would be nice to have something
newer than 1.0.4 going into things like Linux distributions.
Hm, well ... how about everyone (including me) makes sure what's on the
1.1 branch compiles on
Comments? Votes?
Seems reasonable to me.
--Ken
46 matches
Mail list logo
