[Dovecot] Who's wrong, atmail or dovecot?

[Timo Sirainen]

On Mar 11, 2008, at 2:51 PM, Andy Dills wrote:

>
> We recently switched to atmail, as well as dovecot. I noticed in  
> atmail
> the size of the mailboxes was always reported as 0kb.
>
> So, I did some debugging, and it boiled down to the fact that the  
> regular
> expression used by dovecot expected UID before SIZE, but Dovecot  
> returned
> SIZE before UID. No biggy, I changed the regex, but I was curious if  
> there
> was a standard.

The fields in FETCH reply can be in any order.

> Here's the diff I implemented to make it work:
> http://www.xecu.net/atmail/dovecot_sizes.diff
>
> So...is this something that is standard or something atmail needs to
> handle by making their regex more dynamic?

IMAP protocol can't be parsed correctly with just regular expressions..

But since there are a lot of bad IMAP client implementations, I  
suppose I could make UID FETCH put the UID before other fields: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.1/rev/5b18c2ff2e2d

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20080311/3429f883/attachment.bin