Re: mutt + dovecot/squirrelmail + mbox ?
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 10:51:16PM -0600, Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
} So I finally bit the bullet and installed IMAP so that I could use one
} of the non-openwebmail webmails. Squirrelmail's docs make a big point
} of how if you're running mbox and don't make sure the locking
} mechanisms are well-coordinated, you run a risk of turning your
} mailboxes into hamburger.
}
} How do I find out if mutt and dovecot see eye-to-eye on locking
} mechanisms?
}
} I've heard lots about how dangerous mbox is and how I should probably
} not even be using it, but I've been using mbox for an awfully long
} time now, and I have a feeling that converting my system would be
} non-trivial. Or at least annoying. While I understand that maildir
} allows you to isolate corruption to single messages instead of the
} entire mailbox, I guess corruption just seems so unlikely that I
} haven't worried about it. I'm sure it will bite me soon.
For similar reasons, I installed courier-imap and squirrelmail. Courier
uses maildir instead of mbox, and maildir does not require locking. I've
been looking into moving my old mail (in mboxes) over to maildirs. I've
installed mb2md and it seems to do a good job of converting mbox files to
maildirs.
I can use mutt directly on the maildirs with no difficulty. I generally use
mutt to connect via IMAP, though. I have the folders variable set to the
IMAP URL and mailboxes set to = and a couple others. It works nicely.
I haven't tried dovecot, but I like Courier. My wife has been connecting to
it with Mozilla mail, Thunderbird, and MacOS X's Mail.app for a couple of
years. I'm just migrating to it, but it's been working nicely for me.
} monique
--Greg
Reply to: