On Fri, Oct 23, 2015, at 08:39, ktm@xxxxxxxx wrote: > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:54:28PM +0200, Eric Luyten wrote: > > On Thu, October 22, 2015 10:39 pm, ktm@xxxxxxxx wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:32:40AM -0400, bacon wrote: > > > > > >> Apple released OS 10.11.1 update yesterday. It shows that it includes, > > >> > > >> > > >> - Fixes an issue where outgoing server information may be missing from > > >> Mail > > >> - Resolves an issue that prevented display of messages and mailboxes in > > >> Mail > > >> > > >> > > >> Does anyone know if this fixed the problem. I've asked my users not to > > >> use Mail on El Capitan until this bug is fixed. > > >> > > >> Meanwhile, I'm working in my spare time to upgrade my cyrus-imapd on > > >> RedHat Enterprise Linux 6 from the 2.3 series distributed by RedHat to > > >> the 2.5 series which I'll have to build and maintain myself. That's an ugly > > >> job and one that I don't really want to do. > > >> > > >> Fred > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Hi Fred, > > > > > > > > > It does not appear to have addressed the problem. We are trying to gather > > > more information. > > > > > > In > > > > https://discussions.apple.com/thread/7267399 > > > > someone states older Cyrus servers are returning a syntactically not quite > > correct response to the EXPUNGE command but I'm having a hard time buying > > this for an explanation. > > > > Oh, and someone in there asks for help to get the Apple bug report (22996765) > > escalated. > > > > I think at our site we have reached the count of 100 (one hundred) El Capitan > > Mail.app users. > > > > > > Eric. > > > > Hi Eric, > > If they are thinking that the example in the RFC is the specification, they are > not correct. The IMAP server responses to determine completion of the EXPUNGE > command are "OK" for a completed EXPUNGE, "NO" for a failure, and "BAD for unknown > command or invalid arguments. Everything after those words are not germane to > whether or not the command completed. The tag is what links the OK to the EXPUNGE > command and not the "EXPUNGE completed". Sigh, they had it right and now it is > broken. Actually, the ImapTest command complained about this too: http://imapwiki.org/ImapTest >From RFC3501: response-tagged = tag SP resp-cond-state CRLF resp-cond-state = ("OK" / "NO" / "BAD") SP resp-text ; Status condition resp-text = ["[" resp-text-code "]" SP] text text = 1*TEXT-CHAR So the exact text after the OK response doesn't matter, but it MUST be SP followed by at least 1 TEXT-CHAR. This is pretty easy to patch in 2.3.x if you're forced to remain there for reasons. It is, of course, fixed in later versions. Bron. -- Bron Gondwana brong@xxxxxxxxxxx ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://www.cyrusimap.org/ List Archives/Info: http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/info-cyrus/ To Unsubscribe: https://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/info-cyrus
