Re: recv(..., MSG_PEEK) (was Re: fetchmail 5.9.8 and maildrop 1.3.7)

2002-03-05 Thread Jason Tishler
Corinna, On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 10:14:07AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 10:56:50AM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote: > > Could you comment as to whether or not the above changes would have any > > positive affects on the following? > > > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/

Re: recv(..., MSG_PEEK) (was Re: fetchmail 5.9.8 and maildrop 1.3.7)

2002-03-05 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 10:56:50AM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote: > Corinna, > > On Sun, Mar 03, 2002 at 03:58:18PM +, Rui Carmo wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 09:47:19PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote: > > > > I was under the impression that recv() bugs had been twiddled in > > > > 1.3.10... Or

recv(..., MSG_PEEK) (was Re: fetchmail 5.9.8 and maildrop 1.3.7)

2002-03-04 Thread Jason Tishler
Corinna, On Sun, Mar 03, 2002 at 03:58:18PM +, Rui Carmo wrote: > On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 09:47:19PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote: > > > I was under the impression that recv() bugs had been twiddled in > > > 1.3.10... Or did the changes in recv() not address MSG_PEEK? > > > > Hmm, I will look

Re: fetchmail 5.9.8 and maildrop 1.3.7

2002-03-03 Thread Rui Carmo
Jason, On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 09:47:19PM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote: > Rui, > > > I was under the impression that recv() bugs had been twiddled in > > 1.3.10... Or did the changes in recv() not address MSG_PEEK? > > Hmm, I will look into this. It would be great if my patch just became > obsol

Re: fetchmail 5.9.8 and maildrop 1.3.7

2002-03-02 Thread Jason Tishler
Rui, On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 10:12:20PM +, Rui Carmo wrote: > On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 11:03:32AM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote: > > However, so far no one else seems to have noticed this problem. > > I was under the impression that recv() bugs had been twiddled in > 1.3.10... Or did the changes

Re: fetchmail 5.9.8 and maildrop 1.3.7

2002-03-02 Thread Rui Carmo
Jason, On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 11:03:32AM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote: > If you run under Win2K (and possibly WinXP), you may want to see the > following to save yourself some grief: > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2001-08/msg00628.html > > However, so far no one else seems to have n

Re: fetchmail 5.9.8 and maildrop 1.3.7

2002-03-02 Thread Jason Tishler
Rui, On Sat, Mar 02, 2002 at 12:45:12AM +, Rui Carmo wrote: > Just to report that fetchmail 5.9.8 compiles cleanly on cygwin, If you run under Win2K (and possibly WinXP), you may want to see the following to save yourself some grief: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2001-08/msg00628.

fetchmail 5.9.8 and maildrop 1.3.7

2002-03-01 Thread Rui Carmo
Hello again, Just to report that fetchmail 5.9.8 compiles cleanly on cygwin, and that we seem to be heading towards a fully functioning e-mail solution (well, with ssmtp to forward mail to a smarter MTA, at least). Just grab the sources and do: /configure --with-ssl make make install (I did