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

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #17101 > unrolled thread

Product LockIn

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  Product LockIn no.top.post@gmail.com - 2016-03-25 12:54 +0000
    Re: Product LockIn Rick Pikul/Chakat Firepaw <chakatfirepaw@gmail.com> - 2016-03-25 22:52 +0000
      Re: Product LockIn colonel_hack@yahoo.com - 2016-03-25 21:28 -0700
      Re: Product LockIn Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2016-03-26 12:53 +0000
        Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-26 13:07 +0000
          Re: Product LockIn Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2016-03-27 11:47 -0700
            Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-28 01:10 +0100
              Re: Product LockIn Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2016-03-27 17:58 -0700
                Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-28 10:46 +0100
                  Re: Product LockIn Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2016-03-28 12:33 -0700
                  Re: Product LockIn Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-28 20:30 +0000
                    Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-28 21:47 +0100
                    Re: Product LockIn Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@gmail.com> - 2016-03-29 02:28 +0000
                Re: Product LockIn Caver1 <caver1@inthemud.org> - 2016-03-28 08:12 -0400
                  Re: Product LockIn Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2016-03-28 07:11 -0700
        Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-26 15:18 +0100
          Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-26 15:04 +0000
            Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-26 21:25 +0100
              Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-27 12:05 +0100
                Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-27 15:57 +0200
                  Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-29 12:26 +0200
                Re: Product LockIn Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-03-27 14:45 +0000
                  Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-27 16:25 +0100
                    Re: Product LockIn Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-03-27 16:05 +0000
                      Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-29 04:35 +0200
                      Re: Product LockIn Unknown <dog@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 01:59 +0000
                        Re: Product LockIn Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2016-03-30 21:15 -0700
                        Re: Product LockIn Chick Tower <c.tower@deadspam.com> - 2016-03-31 16:36 +0000
                          Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-04-01 03:45 +0200
                            Re: Product LockIn "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2016-04-01 21:54 +0200
                              Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-04-01 22:46 +0200
                    Re: Product LockIn Mark Carroll <mtbc@ixod.org> - 2016-03-27 18:14 +0100
                    Re: Product LockIn Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-03-27 20:52 +0100
                      Re: Product LockIn The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-28 01:12 +0100
                        Re: Product LockIn Mark Carroll <mtbc@ixod.org> - 2016-03-28 08:32 +0100
                        Re: Product LockIn Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2016-03-28 11:47 +0100
                        Re: Product LockIn Aaron Baugher <aaron@baugher.biz> - 2016-03-28 07:07 -0500
                    Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-29 04:32 +0200
              Re: Product LockIn "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2016-03-27 15:07 +0200
                Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-27 15:54 +0200
                  Re: Product LockIn "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2016-03-28 01:34 +0200
          Re: Product LockIn no.top.post@gmail.com - 2016-03-28 02:55 +0000
            Re: Product LockIn "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-03-29 04:44 +0200
        Re: Product LockIn Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-03-26 19:05 +0000
    Re: Product LockIn sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2016-03-30 14:37 +0000

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#17138

On 2016-03-27 15:57, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2016-03-27 13:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
> 
>>> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of
>>> duplicates.
>>>
>> BUT the data still stays on the IMAP server.
> 
> No.
> 
> Only if that server is GMAIL, because it is their stated goal to archive
> all your mail. The space they give you is huge, so there is no need to
> delete anything, they say.
> 
> However, this is configurable. I don't do that, but I believe there is
> an option in the web configuration. Others that do may explain the details.

From the fetchmail FAQ:

<http://www.fetchmail.info/fetchmail-FAQ.html#I9>

And from a recent post in the fetchmail mail list:

POP Download:
1. Enable POP for *all* mail
2. When messages are accessed with POP: [keep Gmail's copy in the Inbox]

IMAP Access:
* Status: Enable IMAP
* When I mark a message in IMAP as deleted: (*) Auto-Expunge off - Wait
for the client to update the server
* When a message is marked as deleted and expunged from the last visible
IMAP folder: (*) Immediately delete the message forever
* Folder Size Limits: (*) Do not limit...


<https://sourceforge.net/p/fetchmail/mailman/message/34668658/>


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

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

#17114

On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 12:05:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2016-03-26 16:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 26/03/16 14:18, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>>>> Then use fetchmail or similar.
>>>
>>> Indeed.
>>>
>>> If that's what you have, the stock way is to run some kind of MTA on a
>>> linux machine and have a script that handles connection, flushes the
>>> send queues (sendmail -q, or equivalent)  to the 'smart host' and
>>> fetches the POP mail from somewhere (fetchmail).
>>
>> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of duplicates.
>>
> BUT the data still stays on the IMAP server.

I can not prove that offhand, but I believe there is a fetchmail
option to have the mail remain on the server or not, your choice in
the fetchmail config file.

Originally I had fetchmail setup to pull the mail and delete it from
the server. I have dovecot running so thunderbird would have no problems 
connecting to my MTA mailbox for reading/replying in the imap mode.

Replying or sending in that methodology no longer works because my
mail is being rejected because reverse dns look up fails because my MTA
is not in a registered domain or some such thing.

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

#17115

On 27/03/16 15:45, Bit Twister wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 12:05:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2016-03-26 16:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 26/03/16 14:18, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Then use fetchmail or similar.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed.
>>>>
>>>> If that's what you have, the stock way is to run some kind of MTA on a
>>>> linux machine and have a script that handles connection, flushes the
>>>> send queues (sendmail -q, or equivalent)  to the 'smart host' and
>>>> fetches the POP mail from somewhere (fetchmail).
>>>
>>> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of duplicates.
>>>
>> BUT the data still stays on the IMAP server.
>
> I can not prove that offhand, but I believe there is a fetchmail
> option to have the mail remain on the server or not, your choice in
> the fetchmail config file.
>

Not with IMAP. The whole point of IMAP is that all the clients synch to 
a single online server space.

"IMAP was designed with the goal of permitting complete management of an 
email box by multiple email clients, Therefore, clients generally leave 
messages on the server until the user explicitly deletes them"


POP is a 'store till I download' protocol. Imap is not.


> Originally I had fetchmail setup to pull the mail and delete it from
> the server. I have dovecot running so thunderbird would have no problems
> connecting to my MTA mailbox for reading/replying in the imap mode.
>
> Replying or sending in that methodology no longer works because my
> mail is being rejected because reverse dns look up fails because my MTA
> is not in a registered domain or some such thing.
>

MMm. you need a smart host then.

Oddly enough, getting a virtual private server for a fistful of dollars, 
and a small fist at that - is no big deal and is probably te easiest way 
to have your own domain and email setup entirely under your control, 
independent from any ISP,  and accessible how you want and where you want.


-- 
Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 
twenty-first century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a 
globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, 
on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer 
projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to 
contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.

Richard Lindzen

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

#17116

On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:25:46 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 27/03/16 15:45, Bit Twister wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 12:05:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:

>>>> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of duplicates.
>>>>
>>> BUT the data still stays on the IMAP server.
>>
>> I can not prove that offhand, but I believe there is a fetchmail
>> option to have the mail remain on the server or not, your choice in
>> the fetchmail config file.
>>
>
> Not with IMAP. The whole point of IMAP is that all the clients synch to 
> a single online server space.

>
> "IMAP was designed with the goal of permitting complete management of an 
> email box by multiple email clients, Therefore, clients generally leave 
> messages on the server until the user explicitly deletes them"


What can I say. Pretty sure my original .fetchmailrc had nokeep which
removed the email from gmail.com after download, and I configured
thunderbird to use localhost. Now that my send emails fail I changed
.fetchmailrc to keep, which leaves the email at gmail.com and
thunderbird for gmail.com. Example: 

# cat ~/.fetchmailrc
poll "imap.gmail.com" with proto IMAP 
 user "justme@gmail.com" there with password "a secret"
 is justme here
 options ssl sslcertck fetchall stripcr keep


>> Replying or sending in that methodology no longer works because my
>> mail is being rejected because reverse dns look up fails because my MTA
>> is not in a registered domain or some such thing.
>>
>
> MMm. you need a smart host then.

I do not know what that means. All I know was mail used to go through using
postfix generic with
    bittwister@wb.home.test justme@gmail.com
    bittwister@localhost.home.test  justme@gmail.com
and all reply emails would go back to gmail.com as desired.
Now the messages are rejected.


> Oddly enough, getting a virtual private server for a fistful of dollars, 
> and a small fist at that - is no big deal and is probably te easiest way 
> to have your own domain and email setup entirely under your control, 
> independent from any ISP,  and accessible how you want and where you want.

Yeah, forgot about that. I had looked into it until I got postfix generic 
working and forgot about using a domain of my own. I toggle ISP whenever 
I can save money, so I had already moved all my email addresses to
free mail servers. 

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

#17136

On 2016-03-27 18:05, Bit Twister wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:25:46 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


>> MMm. you need a smart host then.
> 
> I do not know what that means. All I know was mail used to go through using
> postfix generic with
>     bittwister@wb.home.test justme@gmail.com
>     bittwister@localhost.home.test  justme@gmail.com
> and all reply emails would go back to gmail.com as desired.
> Now the messages are rejected.

If you want to send email with postfix via your gmail account, ask. It
can be an "smart host" or not. Basically you have to teach postfix to
authenticate to gmail with the appropriate login/password data.

-- 
Cheers,
       Carlos E.R.

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

#17140

On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:05:55 +0000, Bit Twister wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:25:46 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 27/03/16 15:45, Bit Twister wrote:
>>> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 12:05:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 26/03/16 20:25, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> 
---snip--
>>>
>>> I can not prove that offhand, but I believe there is a fetchmail
>>> option to have the mail remain on the server or not, your choice in
>>> the fetchmail config file.
>>>
>>>
>> Not with IMAP. The whole point of IMAP is that all the clients synch to
>> a single online server space.
> 
> 
>> "IMAP was designed with the goal of permitting complete management of
>> an email box by multiple email clients, Therefore, clients generally
>> leave messages on the server until the user explicitly deletes them"
> 
> 
> What can I say. Pretty sure my original .fetchmailrc had nokeep which
> removed the email from gmail.com after download, and I configured
> thunderbird to use localhost. Now that my send emails fail I changed
> .fetchmailrc to keep, which leaves the email at gmail.com and
> thunderbird for gmail.com. Example:
> 
> # cat ~/.fetchmailrc
> poll "imap.gmail.com" with proto IMAP
>  user "justme@gmail.com" there with password "a secret" is justme here
>  options ssl sslcertck fetchall stripcr keep
> 
> 
>>> Replying or sending in that methodology no longer works because my
>>> mail is being rejected because reverse dns look up fails because my
>>> MTA is not in a registered domain or some such thing.
>>>
>>>
>> MMm. you need a smart host then.
> 
> I do not know what that means. All I know was mail used to go through
> using postfix generic with
>     bittwister@wb.home.test justme@gmail.com
>     bittwister@localhost.home.test  justme@gmail.com
> and all reply emails would go back to gmail.com as desired. Now the
> messages are rejected.
> 
> 
>> Oddly enough, getting a virtual private server for a fistful of
>> dollars, and a small fist at that - is no big deal and is probably te
>> easiest way to have your own domain and email setup entirely under your
>> control, independent from any ISP,  and accessible how you want and
>> where you want.
> 
> Yeah, forgot about that. I had looked into it until I got postfix
> generic working and forgot about using a domain of my own. I toggle ISP
> whenever I can save money, so I had already moved all my email addresses
> to free mail servers.

The above complex elaborate description shows how the big
US corparations are entrapping us to become another generation of
<lucky strike addicts>. 

In the 90s you could have the EmailTextFrames lying on your
screen: received, written and ready to send, directory of in box ....;
and with just-2-klux-each could eg. send-that-one, fetch-that-one .....

Now with the US commercial giants vying to capture as many as possible 
locked-in victims, you face the following:-----
Hi **,
  Someone just tried to sign in to your Google Account **** from an app 
 that doesn't meet modern security standards.
Details:
Monday, March 28, 2016 2:58 AM (GMT)
  We strongly recommend that you use a secure app, like Gmail, to access 
 your account. All apps made by Google meet these security standards. 
 Using a less secure app, on the other hand, could leave your account 
 vulnerable. Learn more.

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

#17141

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.os.linux.slackware.]
On 2016-03-31, Unknown <dog@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The above complex elaborate description shows how the big
> US corparations are entrapping us to become another generation of
><lucky strike addicts>. 

If you don't like gmail then don't use it.  Run your own SMTP server,
and try to fix it after you get pwn3d an hour later.

--keith

-- 
kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information

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

#17144

On 2016-03-31, Unknown wrote:
> Hi **,
>   Someone just tried to sign in to your Google Account **** from an app 
>  that doesn't meet modern security standards.
> Details:
> Monday, March 28, 2016 2:58 AM (GMT)
>   We strongly recommend that you use a secure app, like Gmail, to access 
>  your account. All apps made by Google meet these security standards. 
>  Using a less secure app, on the other hand, could leave your account 
>  vulnerable. Learn more.

What program did you use to cause this response?
-- 
                                 Chick Tower

For e-mail:  aols2 DOT sent DOT towerboy AT xoxy DOT net

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

#17145

On 2016-03-31 18:36, Chick Tower wrote:
> On 2016-03-31, Unknown wrote:
>> Hi **,
>>   Someone just tried to sign in to your Google Account **** from an app 
>>  that doesn't meet modern security standards.
>> Details:
>> Monday, March 28, 2016 2:58 AM (GMT)
>>   We strongly recommend that you use a secure app, like Gmail, to access 
>>  your account. All apps made by Google meet these security standards. 
>>  Using a less secure app, on the other hand, could leave your account 
>>  vulnerable. Learn more.
> 
> What program did you use to cause this response?

This is standard and new but known gmail behaviour.
Just ignore and disable what they call, IIRC, double security.
Basically, web based security.
They could instead user client certificates, which is standard but
little known.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

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

#17146

Carlos E.R. <robin_lis...@invalid.es> [CE]:
CE> double security.  Basically, web based security.
CE> They could instead user client certificates,
CE> which is standard but little known.

Two factor authentication (which gmail and other web properties
seem to favour these days) is not equivalent (security wise) to client
certificates.

Unless of course the certificate keys are encrypted and 2-factor
authentication is needed for their decryption ;-)

Besides, public key infrastructure management (creation, distribution,
recall of certicates) has proved to be a royal pain. Add to that the
need to keep multiple copies of those certificates and their keys on
every networked device one uses (including virus/spyware/ransomware/etc
laden windows pc's) so as to maintain the same digital identity and it
becomes a faux pas.

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

#17147

On 2016-04-01 21:54, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
> 
> Carlos E.R. <robin_lis...@invalid.es> [CE]:
> CE> double security.  Basically, web based security.
> CE> They could instead user client certificates,
> CE> which is standard but little known.
> 
> Two factor authentication (which gmail and other web properties
> seem to favour these days) is not equivalent (security wise) to client
> certificates.

Quite.

But that two factor authentication has to be disabled if one wants to
use, say, fetchmail.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

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

#17117

On 27 Mar 2016, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 27/03/16 15:45, Bit Twister wrote:
(snip)
>> I can not prove that offhand, but I believe there is a fetchmail
>> option to have the mail remain on the server or not, your choice in
>> the fetchmail config file.

Yes, it's what keep/nokeep is about?

> Not with IMAP. The whole point of IMAP is that all the clients synch to 
> a single online server space.

You're sure of that? My memory of fetchmail is that it can delete them
from IMAP just fine on download and a look at the current docs seems to
confirm that. I even find threads from fetchmail users who are unhappy
that it is deleting their IMAP-accessed mail from the server!

> "IMAP was designed with the goal of permitting complete management of an 
> email box by multiple email clients, Therefore, clients generally leave 
> messages on the server until the user explicitly deletes them"

"Generally". For instance I grab my mail via IMAP using Gnus with
(setq mail-source-delete-incoming t) and that works just fine to
delete them.

> POP is a 'store till I download' protocol. Imap is not.

IMAP is very flexible.

(snip)
>> Replying or sending in that methodology no longer works because my
>> mail is being rejected because reverse dns look up fails because my MTA
>> is not in a registered domain or some such thing.
>
> MMm. you need a smart host then.

Absolutely.

> Oddly enough, getting a virtual private server for a fistful of dollars, 
> and a small fist at that - is no big deal and is probably te easiest way 
> to have your own domain and email setup entirely under your control, 
> independent from any ISP,  and accessible how you want and where you want.

That's exactly what I do, but it's not for those who don't want to learn
how to configure and maintain a mailserver. It's easy not to notice you
messed things up and can cause real problems if you did.

-- Mark

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

#17119

On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:25:46 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:


> 
> Not with IMAP. The whole point of IMAP is that all the clients synch
> to a single online server space.
> 
> "IMAP was designed with the goal of permitting complete management of
> an email box by multiple email clients, Therefore, clients generally
> leave messages on the server until the user explicitly deletes them"
> 
> 
> POP is a 'store till I download' protocol. Imap is not.
> 
> 
>

But it must always be possible to delete email from a server,
whatever protocol is used. IMAP allows downloading followed by
deletion, with the default of non-deletion, POP is the other way
around. Either can be used to leave mail on the server or remove all of
it.

-- 
Joe

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

#17122

On 27/03/16 20:52, Joe wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:25:46 +0100
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Not with IMAP. The whole point of IMAP is that all the clients synch
>> to a single online server space.
>>
>> "IMAP was designed with the goal of permitting complete management of
>> an email box by multiple email clients, Therefore, clients generally
>> leave messages on the server until the user explicitly deletes them"
>>
>>
>> POP is a 'store till I download' protocol. Imap is not.
>>
>>
>>
>
> But it must always be possible to delete email from a server,
> whatever protocol is used. IMAP allows downloading followed by
> deletion, with the default of non-deletion, POP is the other way
> around.

No it isnt. You must send a pop server an express DELE command

Either can be used to leave mail on the server or remove all of
> it.
>
My limited experience of IMAP suggests that only when you delete mail on 
the client, does it delete it on the server.

Just downloading it is not enough, and if you delete it on the client, 
then its gone , so if you want to keep mail on the client but not on the 
server you can't do it.


-- 
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

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

#17125

On 28 Mar 2016, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
(snip)
> My limited experience of IMAP suggests that only when you delete mail on 
> the client, does it delete it on the server.
>
> Just downloading it is not enough, and if you delete it on the client, 
> then its gone , so if you want to keep mail on the client but not on the 
> server you can't do it.

Of course you can if your client retains a local copy as mine is
configured to. Both POP3 and IMAP allow retrieval from the server and
deletion on the server as separate actions. What the client does on its
side is its choice regardless of by which protocol it does it.

-- Mark

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

#17127

On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 01:12:52 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 27/03/16 20:52, Joe wrote:
> > On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:25:46 +0100
> > The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >  
> >>
> >> Not with IMAP. The whole point of IMAP is that all the clients
> >> synch to a single online server space.
> >>
> >> "IMAP was designed with the goal of permitting complete management
> >> of an email box by multiple email clients, Therefore, clients
> >> generally leave messages on the server until the user explicitly
> >> deletes them"
> >>
> >>
> >> POP is a 'store till I download' protocol. Imap is not.
> >>
> >>
> >>  
> >
> > But it must always be possible to delete email from a server,
> > whatever protocol is used. IMAP allows downloading followed by
> > deletion, with the default of non-deletion, POP is the other way
> > around.  
> 
> No it isnt. You must send a pop server an express DELE command

Which a POP3 client will do by default, unless the user has
specifically requested that messages will be kept on the server.
Fetchmail will do it by default, unless the --keep directive is used.

> 
> Either can be used to leave mail on the server or remove all of
> > it.
> >  
> My limited experience of IMAP suggests that only when you delete mail
> on the client, does it delete it on the server.
> 
But how does it know? The client must tell the server this.

> Just downloading it is not enough, and if you delete it on the
> client, then its gone , so if you want to keep mail on the client but
> not on the server you can't do it.
> 
> 
When you change the status of a message on the client, such as by
deleting it, the client will typically send a STORE command to alter the
flags of the message on the server copy. The /deleted flag is set, and
the next EXPUNGE command will delete everything from the server with
this flag set.

But a specialist program such as a downloader does not have to behave in
the same way as a desktop client. It would be no problem at all for
fetchmail (and I don't know for sure how it behaves) to retrieve a
message, pass it to its local MTA or other delivery destination, and
when it received confirmation that the message has been accepted, to
set the IMAP server's /deleted flag for that message.

Sorry, I did have to look it up again, but some years ago I wrote some
PHP to pull database updates from a local IMAP server, where they had
been securely sent by a script running on a master SQL server elsewhere.

-- 
Joe

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

#17128

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:

> My limited experience of IMAP suggests that only when you delete mail on the
> client, does it delete it on the server.
>
> Just downloading it is not enough, and if you delete it on the client, then
> its gone , so if you want to keep mail on the client but not on the server
> you can't do it.

Some mail clients do try to keep their local folders synced with the remote,
because they assume that's what the user wants: he can login with various
clients and see the same content.  But nothing about IMAP requires that.

My fetchmail is configured to get mail from two IMAP servers (and a few POP3
servers).  In one case, it has the 'keep' option specified, so it gets a
message, spools it out to SMTP at localhost (which is qmail which sends it on
to my maildir), then moves on to the next message.

In the other case, it doesn't have the 'keep' option set, so it gets a
message, spools it out to SMTP at localhost -- and then (if that was
successful) tells the server to delete it, then moves on to the next message.

In both cases, fetchmail is the "client," yet it has no idea what local copies
of anything I have, so it certainly can't tell the server what to keep/delete
based on that.


-- 
Aaron -- aaron.baugher.biz

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

#17135

On 2016-03-27 17:25, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 27/03/16 15:45, Bit Twister wrote:


>> I can not prove that offhand, but I believe there is a fetchmail
>> option to have the mail remain on the server or not, your choice in
>> the fetchmail config file.

Yes. It is "keep".


> Not with IMAP. The whole point of IMAP is that all the clients synch to
> a single online server space.

Of course you can with IMAP and fetchmail. By default fetchmail tells
the imap server to delete fetched email.

-- 
Cheers,
       Carlos E.R.

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

#17111

Carlos E.R. <robin_lis...@invalid.es> [CE]:
CE> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of
CE> duplicates.

POP is OK: just use a local procmail/reformail filter to ignore
messages carrying a recently seen Message-ID.

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

#17112

On 2016-03-27 15:07, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
> 
> Carlos E.R. <robin_lis...@invalid.es> [CE]:
> CE> fetchmail works better with imap than with pop. Less danger of
> CE> duplicates.
> 
> POP is OK: just use a local procmail/reformail filter to ignore
> messages carrying a recently seen Message-ID.

Doesn't always work well, specially if you use more than one computer.

I have been using fetchmail/procmail/MTA for years with gmail and it
works perfect, no duplicate filtering needed. The fetchmail folks
recommend not to use POP if the same server offers IMAP.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

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

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web