On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 21:24 +0100, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 12:55 -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> > The truth is that ETRN is the way your supposed to do this kind of
> > thing, fetchmail is a hack. But even ETRN is not as good as your
> > own server.
>
> And fetchmail is fairly buggy. When I was using it I found that if it
> got interrupted, e.g. by a remote MTA timeout toward the end of a
> session, it would leave a left a lot of mail on the remote MTA that it
> had already fetched but could never be persuaded to delete, probably
> because it saves up all its purges until the bitter end of the session.
Interesting. After years of fetchmail usage, and way above single-figure
millions of messages fetched (just a very conservative estimate), I have
yet to find even one mail stuck on a server.
> IMO getmail is a lot better solution. It never does fetchmail's
> abandoned mail trick and, after about a year's use, I haven't found any
> other problems with it.
Well, I won't go down the route of arguing fetchmail, getmail, or
alternatives. I don't mind. :)
However, I know SA does understand fetchmail headers, and correctly
re-starts header parsing. I guess it is the same with getmail, or does
it simply not add any header?
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
