Re: [Exim] Washington mbx again

Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Scot Elliott
Date:  
To: exim-users
CC: Malcolm Beattie
Subject: Re: [Exim] Washington mbx again
Yeah - I've had problems with mbx locking too. I use exim filters to
split my list traffic to another mbx file. I have two copies of Pine open
- one on my Inbox and on on the list box.

When new mail arrives in my inbox, I see this, but Exim always fails to
deliver to my list box until I close down pine.... But - this only
happens on my FreeBSD system - it doesn't happen on the Solaris one I've
also tested..

Strange and annoying.


Scot

On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Malcolm Beattie wrote:

> Philip Hazel writes:
> > On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Tom Samplonius wrote:
> >
> > > MBX is not propietary. It is a indexed version of mbox.
> >
> > And is supported by Exim. However, you can't use its native locking
> > rules (which permit shared access to mailboxes) if the file is
> > NFS-mounted.
>
> You can't even use it on a local filesystem at the moment because
> the locking isn't quite right. Ray Miller has done enough tests to
> determine that the locking schemes are slightly imcompatible but we
> haven't yet determined a way of fixing it. The contortions that the
> cclient mbx driver goes through to do its locking are, er. Well.
> Indescribable is probably the safest word to use.
>
> --Malcolm
>
> --
> Malcolm Beattie <mbeattie@???>
> Unix Systems Programmer
> Oxford University Computing Services
>
> --
> ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
>