Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.software.thunderbird > #846 > unrolled thread

dat & msf versus mbox

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.software.thunderbird

Contents

  dat & msf versus mbox "Bill Bradshaw" <bradshaw@gci.net> - 2021-07-14 13:31 -0800
    Re: dat & msf versus mbox WaltS48 <schw01@invalid.net> - 2021-07-14 17:58 -0400
      Re: dat & msf versus mbox "Bill Bradshaw" <bradshaw@gci.net> - 2021-07-14 14:05 -0800
      Re: dat & msf versus mbox Bears <Bears@invalid.com> - 2021-07-14 18:55 -0400
        Re: dat & msf versus mbox Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2021-07-14 19:45 -0400
    Re: dat & msf versus mbox Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2021-07-15 12:03 -0700
      Re: dat & msf versus mbox Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2021-07-15 13:57 -0700
        Re: dat & msf versus mbox Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2021-07-15 14:53 -0700
        Re: dat & msf versus mbox "Bill Bradshaw" <bradshaw@gci.net> - 2021-07-15 14:02 -0800
          Re: dat & msf versus mbox Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2021-07-15 15:36 -0700

#846 — dat & msf versus mbox

First you are going to look and ask why I am posting from Outlook Express. 
I just like OE best because it is so simple (I am not simple!!).  I do have 
Thunderbird 89.0b4 installed.  I imported OE messages using an old version 
of TB that would import OE messages and newsgroups.  They imported as dat 
and msf files instead of mbox.  Why and what is the difference and does it 
make any difference?
-- 
<Bill>

Brought to you from Anchorage, Alaska 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#847

On 7/14/21 5:31 PM, Bill Bradshaw wrote:
> First you are going to look and ask why I am posting from Outlook Express.
> I just like OE best because it is so simple (I am not simple!!).  I do have
> Thunderbird 89.0b4 installed.  I imported OE messages using an old version
> of TB that would import OE messages and newsgroups.  They imported as dat
> and msf files instead of mbox.  Why and what is the difference and does it
> make any difference?

.msf is mbox

-- 
OS: Fedora 34 Workstation - Gnome 40 Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
Lock him up! Lock him up!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#848

WaltS48 wrote:
> On 7/14/21 5:31 PM, Bill Bradshaw wrote:
>> First you are going to look and ask why I am posting from Outlook
>> Express. I just like OE best because it is so simple (I am not
>> simple!!).  I do have Thunderbird 89.0b4 installed.  I imported OE
>> messages using an old version of TB that would import OE messages
>> and newsgroups.  They imported as dat and msf files instead of mbox.
>> Why and what is the difference and does it make any difference?
>
> .msf is mbox

At least my confusion is cleared up.

<Bill>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#853

On 7/14/21 5:58 PM, this is what WaltS48 wrote:
> On 7/14/21 5:31 PM, Bill Bradshaw wrote:
>> First you are going to look and ask why I am posting from Outlook Express.
>> I just like OE best because it is so simple (I am not simple!!).  I do have
>> Thunderbird 89.0b4 installed.  I imported OE messages using an old version
>> of TB that would import OE messages and newsgroups.  They imported as dat
>> and msf files instead of mbox.  Why and what is the difference and does it
>> make any difference?
> 
> .msf is mbox
> 
And don't quote me but I know one contains the data and one is an index?!  I've heard some people on newsgroups say just delete one and TB 
will rebuild the other.   Obviously the intent was to blow away the index.

-- 
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.1 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570 laptop
Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory, 512G SSD, 750G & 1TB HDDs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#856

On 2021-07-14 18:55, Bears wrote:
> On 7/14/21 5:58 PM, this is what WaltS48 wrote:
>> On 7/14/21 5:31 PM, Bill Bradshaw wrote:
>>> First you are going to look and ask why I am posting from Outlook 
>>> Express.
>>> I just like OE best because it is so simple (I am not simple!!).  I 
>>> do have
>>> Thunderbird 89.0b4 installed.  I imported OE messages using an old 
>>> version
>>> of TB that would import OE messages and newsgroups.  They imported as 
>>> dat
>>> and msf files instead of mbox.  Why and what is the difference and 
>>> does it
>>> make any difference?
>>
>> .msf is mbox
>>
> And don't quote me but I know one contains the data and one is an 
> index?!  I've heard some people on newsgroups say just delete one and TB 
> will rebuild the other.   Obviously the intent was to blow away the index.
> 


Inbox is the mbox file. Inbox.msf is the index.

When you download a message, it's appended to Inbox, and Inbox.msf is 
rewritten to include the data for that new message.

When you Move or Delete a message, Inbox.msf is updated, but there is no 
change to Inbox. To remove the Moved/Deleted files, you must Compact 
Folders, which rewrites all the mbox files. If you haven't Compacted 
folders for a while, it can take a long time.

If there are glitches in the header list, shut down TB, delete the *.msf 
files, and restart TB. TB will rebuild the *.msf files.

Maildir stores each message individually. Thus,  in this case Inbox is a 
directory.

For newsgroups, the system is different. Poke around in the /News 
directory to find out more.

HTH

-- 
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"How we spend our days is, of course, how we spend our lives."
(Annie Dillard)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#868

Bill Bradshaw wrote:
> I am posting from Outlook Express.
> I just like OE best

As someone who used OE for a very long time, including handling spam and 
malware with it and using an assortment of 3rd party crutches to 
overcome many of its weaknesses, IMO using OE (for anything) is a very 
bad idea.

I liked its comfort and interface, like an old shoe; but I got over that.

OE is tightly integrated w/ a very insecure browser which is tightly 
integrated w/ a very insecure OS.  It is dangerous and insecure.

-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#871

GG wrote:
> 
> When people use the words such as "insecure browser" they need to qualify their statement. 

We are talking about insecure OE and its old associated insecure browser 
IE 3-6 and its old associated insecure OS Wins up to XP; not Edge or Win 10.

I need to kf you and your html-ness.  I' had eliminated the html but not 
your persona yet.



-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#873

GG wrote:
> 
> You need to use E-September.org because that chap from banana
> republic is doing for everybody so that they don't see my posts.

My provider also wisely prohibits its users from posting html, but it 
does not filter out msg/s from other servers (or a couple of groups 
where html is permitted).

I think it is wrong of your usenet-news provider to allow it.

Now we are going off-topic from Tb which fortunately allows one to 
choose how to display html msg content.  You are also wrong to 
'mistreat'/defeat the normal behavior of your newsagent in handling 
html+plaintext.

plonk


-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#874

"Mike Easter" <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote in message 
news:ilblptFmjrlU1@mid.individual.net...
> GG wrote:
>>
>> When people use the words such as "insecure browser" they need to qualify 
>> their statement.
>
> We are talking about insecure OE and its old associated insecure browser 
> IE 3-6 and its old associated insecure OS Wins up to XP; not Edge or Win 
> 10.
>
> I need to kf you and your html-ness.  I' had eliminated the html but not 
> your persona yet.
>
> -- 
> Mike Easter

I do not allow messages to come in as HTML but only as text and only send 
messages as text.  So where would IE come in?  I also disconnect from the 
internet when I am not actively using the internet.

<Bill> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#876

Bill Bradshaw wrote:
> I do not allow messages to come in as HTML but only as text and only send
> messages as text.  So where would IE come in?  I also disconnect from the
> internet when I am not actively using the internet.

You control how you view the msg, not how it 'comes in'.  It comes in 
(into OE storage) as it has been constructed, including html and .doc 
macros.  OE will use/ exercise/ its IE browser engine whenever it wants 
to; you don't actually control that in configuring how you choose to 
view.  OE will activate its 'viewer' (ie browser engine) even when an 
item/msg is 'simply' located in its message pane, you don't even have to 
'open' the msg.

It is true that viewing as plaintext is safer than viewing as html, 
which html rendering 'operation' turns loose the evil which is being 
held in that particular OE store which you download from the server, but 
it would be better if the various vulnerabilities didn't exist.

Depending on which Tb function you are using, such as nntp, unlike OE Tb 
doesn't actually store the msg/s you see in the thread pane, but 
accesses the viewed/opened msg into a cache when it is accessed.  Until 
then only a subset of the msg headers from the overview is stored.

The situation w/ POP vs IMAP is different.

I'm not saying that it is impossible to handle malwared msg/s w/ OE, 
because I've done it a lot, just that one needs to be wary.

-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.software.thunderbird

csiph-web