Re: [OT] maildir
On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 09:03 +1100, Brian May wrote:
> >>>>> "Michelle" == Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@freenet.de> writes:
>
> >> > inefficient at storing large number of very small files (due
> >> to block > size limitations of file system), and more
> >> complicated to > transfer/move/share.
>
> Michelle> What is complicate ? You need only the right
> Michelle> programs...
>
> Perhaps I should elaborate on this point.
>
> If I want to allow people to download a mbox folder (consider mailing
> list archive), all I do is put in under a HTTP accessible
> directory. People only need to download one file, and IIRC, there is a
> standard (or defacto standard) MIME type for mbox files. I believe a
> browser will automatically start mutt. In fact, I believe this will
> work even if the file is gzipped.
>
> Now take Maildirs... Sure, I could tar.gz the entire directory, but
> this means the recipient must manually untar it before accessing it.
> I don't believe there is a standard MIME type to distinguish these
> files either. As far as your browser is concerned, it isn't "Maildir"
> format, it is "gzipped tar format".
You mean you don't gzip mbox files before putting them "out there"
for public access?
Besides, there's always maildir2mbox, or a wrapper around whatever
library call that any MUA (like Evo & KMail) uses when it moves
things from a Maildir folder to an mbox "folder".
> Also, all mailing list software I have seen so far exclusively uses
> mbox files.
Sure, since all it does is append.
> Sure, these are implementation issues that could be solved, but
> currently mbox wins.
In certain narrow cases. Any time, though, that you have the MUA
updating a big mbox at the same time an MTA is writing to it, issues
will occur.
And then there's NFS. If $USER is mounting $HOME, then mbox files
could get corrupted, but Maildir won't.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson, LA USA
PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail.
"You don't want give people a reason to not invite you to the hot
parties."
Pat Sajak, on being a Republican in Hollywood
Reply to: