[Dovecot] Re: Bug#319504: Bug in 0.99.14 mbox handling - mail UIDs are renumbered without bumping UIDVALIDITY
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005, David McBride wrote:
Package: dovecot-imapd Version: 0.99.14-1 Severity: important
Hi,
I think I've identified a bug in Dovecot 0.99.14 as packaged and distributed by Debian Sarge. I believe the bug lies in the original Dovecot source, not with any modifications made by Debian.
Specifically, this bug deals with Dovecot's handling of message unique identifiers (UIDs) for IMAP clients when using the mbox mailbox storage format.
David, can you check if the problem persists with 0.99.20050712-1 which is in sid? This is actually the 1.0stable branch of dovecot and has many fixes not included in 0.99.x
The package should work correctly on sarge (a proper sarge backport is forthcoming) but you will also need libpq4 from sid and you'll need to make sure dovecot-common is also upgraded to 0.99.20050712-1 also.
-- Jaldhar H. Vyas jaldhar@debian.org La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 12:48 -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
Specifically, this bug deals with Dovecot's handling of message unique identifiers (UIDs) for IMAP clients when using the mbox mailbox storage format.
David, can you check if the problem persists with 0.99.20050712-1 which is in sid? This is actually the 1.0stable branch of dovecot and has many fixes not included in 0.99.x
The package should work correctly on sarge (a proper sarge backport is forthcoming) but you will also need libpq4 from sid and you'll need to make sure dovecot-common is also upgraded to 0.99.20050712-1 also.
Hi,
The server on which I am having this bug is currently running in production, so I have tested the sid package on a seperate sid machine that I already have running. This version of Dovecot did _not_ exhibit the UID-renumbering bug.
It was necessary to create a new dovecot.conf file, but this was straightforward as the changes between the two versions were minor.
Obviously this isn't a perfect test as something ephermeral on the original server could concievably be triggering this problem -- however, I think that is unlikely.
Cheers, David
David McBride dwm@tastycake.net
participants (2)
-
David McBride
-
Jaldhar H. Vyas