Re: mailutils/IMAP (2)

[Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo]

"Alain Magloire" <address@hidden> writes:

> I noticed that you no longer use the "preforked" scheme use in
> the 0.9.8.  I do not know if it's good or bad(think it's good) since
> this not totally portable to all architectures.

It should be good, provided it is coded right. The only reason 0.9.8
and below preforked is because I was having problems creating proper
fork-on-demand code. I was able to create some rather elegant fork
bombs, however.

> All my changes to pop3d are commited, server seems to run without any
> problems but I did not stress it either.
> 
> NOTE:
> - UIDL is implemented in the library (message_get_uidl())
>   the library tries to be compatible by searching an "X-UIDL" header
>   if not send the "Message-ID".  But this is not right since message-id
>   is an optionnal header(according to the rfcs), I should fallback instead
>   to an MD5 or some other schemes ... for later.

I would suggest an MD5-based scheme (like MD5+someotherstuff) and
setting the X-UIDL header if it isn't already there. I'll look into it.

> - Notice that other popd severs will skip the "Status:" fields and some other
>   fields(TOP, RETR) maybe we should do the same.

The other POP3 serves are broken. ;) I don't think there is any
compelling reason to not send any headers to the client, unless there
is some client that depends on a Status: header not being sent, in
which case its maintainers should be drawn, quartered, tarred,
feathered, and then really hurt.

-- sparky, who has second thoughts about tarring and gzipping said
   maintainers rather than tarring and feathering...