Re: [Evolution] imap...synchronization chaos ;)

[Gábor Farkas <gabor z10n net>]

On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 16:47 +0800, Not Zed wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 10:14 +0200, GÃbor Farkas wrote:  
> > hi,

> > when i create an imap account i have an option to:
> > "Automatically synchronize remote mail locally".
> >
> > and also when i right click an imap folder,
> > i have an option to:
> > "Copy folder content locally for offline operation"
> It means that messages will be copied to the local hard disk as they
> arrive on the server.  The old code used to just copy it when you
> 'went offline', if it wasn't there already. 
unfortunately it does not seem to be like that.
i tried the following approach:

1. i created a new imap account in evolution
2. i turned on the auto-sync-remote-mails in the imap account settings
3. i have an INBOX, and also several subdirectories. one of them is
'burn'
4. the INBOX was automatically updated (the number of new mails was
shown),
but not the subdirectories
5. i pressed the send/receive button. the number of unread mails was
updated for all folders.
6. not that i did not went into any of the subdirs.
7. i stopped the network connection (/etc/init.d/net.eth0 stop)
8. i clicked on the 'burn' subdir.
9. evolution froze with a 'opening imap://blabla' in the status bar
10. i've killed evo because i did not want to wait (i assume there's a
timeout...)

so, it does not seem to sync it... :((

is this a bug?

i am using gentoo linux...
i've checked it, and gentoo only applies a small patch to 1.5.93, which
adds libcamel.la to the list of libraries...

(and i use your vertical-layout patch ;) ..btw. any chance of getting
this accepted into evo?)

so it seems i am using a pretty normal evo-1.5.93...

> > is this possible to achieve with those offline-sync options in
> > evolution?
>
> > because when in the past i tested some mail clients, they only fetched
> > the mails
> > when you chose to go offline.
> > but that's not good enough. i don't want to have to do it manually, and
> > also don't
> > want to wait sooo looong while he fetches all my mail (offlineimap only
> > transfersthe differences, so it's pretty fast).
> See above.
>
> If you're using something that works, I suggest you just stick to
> that.  I would think offlineimap will be a lot faster at the actual
> data transfer than Evolution.  Evolution only transfers the new data
> required too, but the actual transfer speed suffers a lot if you have
> any latency in the link.
latency is not really an issue here,
because i am imap-fetching my mail always on broadband connections.
(when i am on a gprs connection, i use the goodo old ssh + mutt
combination ;)


thanks a lot,
gabor farkas