Re: [Evolution] Expunging not working on INBOX (IMAP).
- From: "Zot O'Connor" <zot zotconsulting com>
- To: Evolution List <evolution ximian com>
- Subject: Re: [Evolution] Expunging not working on INBOX (IMAP).
- Date: 07 Mar 2002 15:40:30 -0800
I was able to expunge via telnet.
Both with the UID statement, and with the simplier
A101 EXPUNGE
So now I am wondering why is evolution adding the UID and ranges?
Looking at the RFC "UID EXPUNGE" is not a legitimate command (Only COPY,
FETCH, or STORE). OK strike that, under RFC2539, there is an extension
to UID.
Looking at the server responses:
* CAPABILITY IMAP4 IMAP4rev1 ACL QUOTA LITERAL+ NAMESPACE UIDPLUS
X-NON-HIERARCHICAL-RENAME NO_ATOMIC_RENAME AUTH=DIGEST-MD5 UNSELECT ID
UIDPLUS is listed.
So now I wonder if the message range is "too big" for cyrus, I mean it
is 1760 chars big. Or is it evolution not waiting long enough?
At a minimum it seems like evolution needs to look for the BAD response
and then either send a full expunge, or send partial lists.
It might be nicer to allow the user to day "expunge these deleted
notes."
So looking around I see other people with this error:
...
command\r\n
Is Entourage using a non-standard IMAP command or one not implemented
in
Communigate?
It's "half-standard", it was there, but due to our error it was removed.
Please see:
3.5.2 05-Jan-02
Bug Fix: IMAP: 3.5x versions did not support the UID EXPUNGE command.
So, plz upgrade to 3.5.2 or later.
...
According to RFC2359 if the server does not support the UID EXPUNGE the
client is supposed to fall back to STOR or old EXPUNGE command. So it
looks like Entourage is not falling back. Yes?
...
http://asg.web.cmu.edu/rfc/rfc2359.html#sec-4.1
4.1 UID EXPUNGE Command
Arguments: message set
Data: untagged responses: EXPUNGE
Result: OK - expunge completed
NO - expunge failure (e.g. permission denied)
BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid
Page 3
The UID EXPUNGE command permanently removes from the currently
selected mailbox all messages that both have the \Deleted flag set and
have a UID that is included in the specified message set. If a message
either does not have the \Deleted flag set or is has a UID that is not
included in the specified message set, it is not affected.
This command may be used to ensure that a replayed EXPUNGE command
does not remove any messages that have been marked as \Deleted between
the time that the user requested the expunge operation and the time the
server processes the command.
If the server does not support the UIDPLUS capability, the client
should fall back to using the STORE command to temporarily remove the
\Deleted flag from messages it does not want to remove. The client could
alternatively fall back to using the EXPUNGE command, risking the
unintended removal of some messages.
Example: C: A003 UID EXPUNGE 3000:3002
S: * 3 EXPUNGE
S: * 3 EXPUNGE
S: * 3 EXPUNGE
S: A003 OK UID EXPUNGE completed
From http://asg.web.cmu.edu/rfc/rfc1730.html#sec-6.3.1
6.4.9 UID Command
Arguments: command name
command arguments
Data: untagged responses: FETCH, SEARCH
Result: OK - UID command completed
NO - UID command error
BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid
The UID command has two forms. In the first form, it takes as its
arguments a COPY, FETCH, or STORE command with arguments appropriate for
the associated command. However, the numbers in the message set argument
are unique identifiers instead of message sequence numbers.
6.4.3 EXPUNGE Command
Arguments: none
Data: untagged responses: EXPUNGE
Result: OK - expunge completed
NO - expunge failure: can't expunge (e.g. permission
denied)
BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid
The EXPUNGE command permanently removes from the currently selected
mailbox all messages that have the \Deleted flag set. Before returning
an OK to the client, an untagged EXPUNGE response is sent for each
message that is removed.
Example: C: A202 EXPUNGE
S: * 3 EXPUNGE
S: * 3 EXPUNGE
S: * 5 EXPUNGE
S: * 8 EXPUNGE
S: A202 OK EXPUNGE completed
Note: in this example, messages 3, 4, 7, and 11 had the \Deleted
flag set. See the description of the EXPUNGE response for further
explanation.
--
Zot O'Connor
http://www.ZotConsulting.com
http://www.WhiteKnightHackers.com
--
Zot O'Connor
http://www.ZotConsulting.com
http://www.WhiteKnightHackers.com
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]