Subject: Problems compiling mbxcvt

From: Rolf Habing <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:08:38 +0100

I'm trying to compile mbxcvt (from the latest imap-utils.tar.Z, date Aug
14).
The following error is produced:

[rolf@bay mbxcvt]$ make
`cat ../c-client/CCTYPE` -I../c-client `cat ../c-client/CFLAGS`   -c -o
mbxcvt.o mbxcvt.c
mbxcvt.c: In function `main':
mbxcvt.c:175: warning: passing arg 3 of pointer to function from
incompatible pointer type
mbxcvt.c:175: too few arguments to function
make: *** [mbxcvt.o] Error 1

I'm running RH6.2 (i386).
I had to amend the C = ../imap-2000/c-client as I'm running imap-4.7c.

I need mbxcvt to convert our unix mailboxes to mbx style (about 20,000
of them).
Any patches or hints on how to patch this would be very much
appreciated.

Thanks,

Rolf Habing
Systems and Networking
Canterbury Christ Church University College

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
 For information about this mailing list, and its archives, see: 
 http://www.washington.edu/imap/c-client-list.html
------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Andrej Borsenkow" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 15:55:02 +0400

> I had to amend the C = ../imap-2000/c-client as I'm running imap-4.7c.

You have to compile it with imap-2000. Old imap-utils cannot be compiled with
new c-client; obviously, new imap-utils cannot be compiled with old c-client
:-) I just successfully compiled imap-2000-RC4 and imap-utils.

May be, as long as imap-4.7 is around, there should be two versions of
imap-utils with clear names (imap-utils-4.7 and imap-util-2000).

-andrej

---

From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:32:15 -0700 (PDT)

> I had to amend the C = ../imap-2000/c-client as I'm running imap-4.7c.

That's the cause of the problem.

The current version of mbxcvt must be built with imap-2000.  It does not build
with imap-4.7.

The IMAP utilities often use special, undocumented and unofficial interfaces,
and as such are more dependent upon the version of the IMAP toolkit than
ordinary applications.  In the case of mbxcvt, it does direct-driver calls
(don't try this at home, kids!) because it has to evade c-client's normal
behavior.

This is why a specific version is always used in the IMAP utilities makefiles,
as opposed to a generic imap/c-client (e.g. in Pine).

---

From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:48:21 -0700 (PDT)

> imap-utils with clear names (imap-utils-4.7 and imap-util-2000).

This may be a good idea.  The problem is that I don't want to maintain two
versions for an extended period of time, especially as there have been
some bugfixes.

imap-4.x is dead.  Long live imap-2000 (and successors)...  :-)

-- Mark --

* RCW 19.190 notice: This email address is located in Washington State.	*
* Unsolicited commercial email may be billed $500 per message.		*
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.

---

From: "Andrej Borsenkow" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 09:47:03 +0400

> imap-4.x is dead.  Long live imap-2000 (and successors)...  :-)

Then I suggest at least renaming imap-utils into imap-utils-2000 (or like) to
make it clear they are for new c-client. May be, for the future it also makes
sense to keep names in sync.

-andrej

---

From: "Greg Copeland" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 10:34:55 -0500

I would like to say that I completely agree with this thread.  The
distinction should be make clear.

In this vein, is there a pressing need or requirement to migrate from 4.7c
to the 2000 series?  Has the interface changed much, if any?  What would be
the expected return on such a move?

Thanks,
	Greg

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Andrej Borsenkow
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2000 12:47 AM
To: Mark Crispin
Cc: Rolf Habing; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Problems compiling mbxcvt

> imap-4.x is dead.  Long live imap-2000 (and successors)...  :-)

Then I suggest at least renaming imap-utils into imap-utils-2000 (or like)
to
make it clear they are for new c-client. May be, for the future it also
makes
sense to keep names in sync.

-andrej

---

From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 12:25:27 -0700 (PDT)

> the expected return on such a move?

Here's some of the reasons:

imap-2000 has bug fixes, most notably to "header size inconsistent" crashes on
UNIX.

imap-2000 supports SSL.

imap-2000 supports MULTIAPPEND and LOGINDISABLED capability.

imap-2000 handles non-Y2K compliant dates better.

imap-2000 supports SASL authentication/authorization identity functionality.

All development and bugfixing happens in whatever version is called "BETA" or
"RELEASE CANDIDATE".  The only reason why there were patch releases to 4.7 was
due to the legal delay in releasing a beta for imap-2000 (due to SSL).  That
question was resolved a few months ago.  There will be no more 4.7 patch
releases.

Upgrading is a good thing.  This is especially true with server software.
Server upgrades are less likely to be cosmetic and more likely to address some
important problem or deficiency.

---

From: Federico Giannici <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 19:32:56 +0200

> important problem or deficiency.

And is there any sensible speed improvement from 4.7c and 2000 with the
mbox format?

Thanks,
___________________________________________________
    __
   |-                      [email-masked]
   |ederico Giannici      http://www.neomedia.it
___________________________________________________