Cool, glad that insert_messages() abstacts the physmessage stuff. I kinda got
that from a quick read, but no time this weekend to read into it that much.

The db_copymsg() changes will be included in a9... although if you'd like, I
can send a separate patch to the list if you want to include it sooner.

I was actually quite disappointed with the state of the Sieve interface; I
thought I had it a lot farther along than it actually is :-\  Anyways, I wrote
it for libSieve-2.2.0pre1 and this week I'm going to have pre4 which has a lot
of things changed and really a lot of things fixed.

For now, just getting the LMTP daemon, the unified delivery layer and the
sort/ directories set up should take enough of everyone's time, and are not
even affected by the broken Sieve situation -- just don't ./configure
--with-sieve. Once the framework is in CVS, I'll focus on the Sieve issues.

Aaron


Ilja Booij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

> Hi,
> On Dec 20, 2003, at 6:33 AM, Aaron Stone wrote:
> 
> > Just following up to my own message here, I went ahead and tried out 
> > the
> > directories thing in my own source tree, and it works like a charm. 
> > I'm going
> > to do some more hacking on the lmtp/sorting/sieve patch set and get 
> > version a9
> > up onto the SourceForge project this weekend, or maybe Monday 
> > afternoon.
> I'll just start testing with the a8 patch. And when you're finished 
> with the a9 version (and everything works :) ), we'll use that one.
> >
> > Oh, Ilja, I noticed that you changed the return type of db_copymsg() 
> > again. I
> > gave you a polite time about it, then later a hard time about it... so 
> > now
> > I'll spare no mercy! db_copymsg() really really must give back the id 
> > number
> > of the new message that it has created! I patched it to add the fourth 
> > arg:
> >
> > int db_copymsg(u64_t msg_idnr, u64_t mailbox_to,
> >                u64_t user_idnr, u64_t *newmsg_idnr);
> >
> > Lemme know if that works right, or if I have to fiddle with 
> > physmessage or
> > something crazy like that... I'm not sure yet if I understand how to 
> > use the
> > physmessage layer. Uh, actually, I'm just ignoring it and pretending 
> > that the
> > higher level functions like db_insert_message() take care of 
> > physmessage for
> > me. Is that the case or do I need to rewrite to support physmessage 
> > directly?
> You're completely right. I thought I changed it to return the 
> message_idnr as a call-by-reference parameter. But I didn't..
> 
> You're correct that functions like db_insert_message() will take care 
> of the physmessage table. No worries about that.
> 
> Ilja
> --
> IC&S
> Stadhouderslaan 57
> 3583 JD Utrecht
> telnr. 030-6355730
> faxnr. 030-6355731
> 
> PGP-key:
> http://www.ic-s.nl/keys/ilja.txt
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dbmail-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> 



-- 



Reply via email to