Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-12 Thread Matthew Moore
On Tuesday 12 January 2010 7:58:30 pm Celejar wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:21:54 -0500 > > Rob Owens wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:12:05PM -0500, Celejar wrote: > > > On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:05:15 -0500 > > > Rob Owens wrote: > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > Another benefit of maildir is

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-12 Thread Celejar
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:21:54 -0500 Rob Owens wrote: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:12:05PM -0500, Celejar wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:05:15 -0500 > > Rob Owens wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > Another benefit of maildir is if you use a backup program that does file > > > pooling (like BackupPC

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-12 Thread Rob Owens
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 08:12:05PM -0500, Celejar wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:05:15 -0500 > Rob Owens wrote: > > ... > > > Another benefit of maildir is if you use a backup program that does file > > pooling (like BackupPC). Anytime an mbox changes, that's a new file to > > backup (and usua

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-12 Thread Celejar
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:05:15 -0500 Rob Owens wrote: ... > Another benefit of maildir is if you use a backup program that does file > pooling (like BackupPC). Anytime an mbox changes, that's a new file to > backup (and usually a big one). With maildir, only the new messages > have to be backed

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-12 Thread Rob Owens
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 08:12:30PM -0700, RobertHoltzman wrote: > On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 01:56:23PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > > RobertHoltzman put forth on 1/10/2010 1:01 AM: > > > > One of the Alpine (ex)devs claims it's true. If I ever get the time I'll > > > see about testing it one of the

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-10 Thread RobertHoltzman
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 01:56:23PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > RobertHoltzman put forth on 1/10/2010 1:01 AM: > > One of the Alpine (ex)devs claims it's true. If I ever get the time I'll > > see about testing it one of the distros on my desktop box. Intuitively > > it sounds right as a search wo

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-10 Thread Stan Hoeppner
RobertHoltzman put forth on 1/10/2010 1:01 AM: > On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 08:09:57PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> RobertHoltzman put forth on 1/9/2010 5:45 PM: >>> On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 10:27:33AM -0200, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: Klistvud wrote: > I've heard maildir is more robust tha

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-09 Thread RobertHoltzman
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 08:09:57PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > RobertHoltzman put forth on 1/9/2010 5:45 PM: > > On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 10:27:33AM -0200, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: > >> Klistvud wrote: > >>> I've heard maildir is more robust than mbox in that regard. Can anybody > >>> confirm

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-09 Thread Stan Hoeppner
RobertHoltzman put forth on 1/9/2010 5:45 PM: > On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 10:27:33AM -0200, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: >> Klistvud wrote: >>> I've heard maildir is more robust than mbox in that regard. Can anybody >>> confirm if that's true or not? >>> >> >> I'd say so. Since each message is a

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-09 Thread RobertHoltzman
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 10:27:33AM -0200, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: > Klistvud wrote: > > I've heard maildir is more robust than mbox in that regard. Can anybody > > confirm if that's true or not? > > > > I'd say so. Since each message is a file, if one file gets corrupted > only that messa

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-09 Thread Eduardo M KALINOWSKI
Klistvud wrote: > I've heard maildir is more robust than mbox in that regard. Can anybody > confirm if that's true or not? > I'd say so. Since each message is a file, if one file gets corrupted only that message will be affected. -- I met a wonderful new man. He's fictional, but you can't

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-09 Thread Freeman
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 03:38:17PM +0530, Jeffrin Jose wrote: > > But since something must be moving your mail to Mail/mbox rather than > > the default, I would take a look at your MDA's (procmail) configuration > > as recommended by the mutt FAQ. > > i have invoked " fetchmail -v --mda /usr/bin

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-09 Thread Teemu Likonen
On 2010-01-09 15:38 (+0530), Jeffrin Jose wrote: > i have invoked " fetchmail -v --mda /usr/bin/procmail" > my procmailrc is ... > :0 > * ^To.*bugs.debian.org > debian-bugs You use mbox format so you really should use use lock files when writing to mailboxes. That is, use ":0:" instead of ":0"

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-09 Thread Klistvud
Dne, 09. 01. 2010 10:51:41 je Chris Jones napisal(a): Sounds like the mbox has been corrupted: I've heard maildir is more robust than mbox in that regard. Can anybody confirm if that's true or not? -- Regards, Klistvud Certifiable Loonix User #481801 http://bufferoverflow.tiddlyspot.com

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-09 Thread Jeffrin Jose
> But since something must be moving your mail to Mail/mbox rather than > the default, I would take a look at your MDA's (procmail) configuration > as recommended by the mutt FAQ. i have invoked " fetchmail -v --mda /usr/bin/procmail" my procmailrc is ... { MAILDIR=$HOME/Mail DEFAULT=$MAILDIR/m

Re: unable to open mailbox

2010-01-09 Thread Chris Jones
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 03:35:58AM EST, Jeffrin Jose wrote: > hello > when i try to open my mail box Mail/mbox it gives ...Mail/mbox is not > a mailbox but /var/mail/jeffrin works. here are some outputs.. > { > mbox: ISO-8859 mail text, with very long lines > /var/mail/jeffrin: ASCII mail text,