[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#530741: set all my mails marked NEW as OLD

severity 530741 important


On 2009 m. May 27 d., Wednesday 19:04:49 Pierre THIERRY wrote:
> I used kmail a bit, ages ago, so maybe this setup was just carried
> through various upgrades. Still, what is the meaning of turning all my
> nex mails into old ones without me even seeing their subject?
> > I see that you could not have known kmail defaults but I don't think
> > this is only kmail fault, it is also a user error as both applications
> > are set up to use the same folder for mail storage.
> Couldn't the two applications be nice to each other? mutt wouldn't do
> any modifications to the mail storage without a clear request from the
> user, I'd like the same behaviour from kmail.
kmail is known not to be very reliable when it comes to handling corrupt or 
out-of-sync indices. This is exactly what happened in your case. kmail went 
mad and made all mails read (as per default I guess). I agree that kmail 
should improve its index handling but this is a long standing issue and it 
will go away once kmail gets akonadi support for mail storage (at least that's 
how I understand it).

> > Hence I believe the severity should be lowered but I'm not doing it
> > just now.
> Kmail's current behaviour combined with me having used before led me to
> lose a whole lot of valuable information, without even asking anything
> from kmail, so I still think the severity is that high, but I'm
> obviously biased, as I'm pissed by what happened, so you should have the
> final word.
I agree but it is still an error on your side. I believe such kind of problems 
were the main reason the default mail storage folder was changed to kmail 
private location. So you are a victim here only because you used to be a kmail 
user a LONG LONG item ago and set up the same mail folder for mutt. Hence 
lowering severity.

Modestas Vainius <modestas@vainius.eu>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: