Re: Problem with FccMRU

On 2002.11.20 04:48 Martin Leopold wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2002 16:39:59 Peter Bloomfield wrote:
>>> at some point we started refering to mailboxes using their url instead
>>> of their name to avoid unfortunate mixups. i think this was post 1.4.1
>>> though. what was your old and new version ?
> My old version was 1.3.6. I can't remember when I switched, and I'm not 
> sure that the problem started when I switched - even though that would 
> be the most logical.
>> 1.4.0 and 1.4.1 both use the mailbox's url to identify it, but without 
>> the user-name in IMAP urls. I'm puzzled by the problem, though. 
>> "Sentbox" isn't a url, and iirc that FccMRU section has always used 
>> urls, so it's not clear to me how "Sentbox" got in there!
> I dint change anything in those settings for several years, so perhaps 
> the convertion of old entries to URLs is to blame?

Iirc Balsa pre-1.3.7 didn't save the fcc-box in the config, so there was 
no conversion. However...Balsa does pick up the fcc-box from a message 
that's been postponed (the "X-Mutt-Fcc:" header); the same header was used 
in the old version with the fcc-box's name and the new version with its 
url. It's just possible that you had postponed a message with 1.3.6 and 
retrieved it with 1.4.x. It's just speculation, but that looks like a 
conceivable pathway for "Sentbox" to get into the url-list.

Balsa doesn't discard an fcc-url when it fails to find the corresponding 
mailbox, because it may become valid again (if a file is restored, or an 
IMAP connection is made, for instance)--that's why this invalid one kept 
being saved in the config. Being able to distinguish bad urls from valid 
but unavailable ones would be nice. Perhaps we should make some minimal 
check: currently, all mailbox urls begin with "file://", "imap://", or 
"imaps://", which would have been enough to reject "Sentbox"!

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]