[fetchmail-users] [PATCH] Re: RETR with UIDL

[Sunil S. <sh...@bo...>]

Quoting from Matthias Andree's mail on Fri, Mar 03, 2006:
> > The advice being given to force fetchmail to avoid using "TOP" with
> > these buggy servers is to enable the "fetchall" option. The FAQ is
> > littered with this advice for various servers with variety of
> > problems. The problems with "fetchall" option are:
> >
> > - "fetchall" cannot be used with "uidl"
> 
> Well, we can fix eventual incompatibilities between these two options
> any time. 6.3.X is open for bug fixes.

Here is a patch for this.

================================================================
Index: fetchmail-6.3/pop3.c
===================================================================
--- fetchmail-6.3/pop3.c	(revision 4719)
+++ fetchmail-6.3/pop3.c	(working copy)
@@ -894,7 +894,7 @@
      */
     last = 0;
     *newp = -1;
-    if (*countp > 0 && !ctl->fetchall)
+    if (*countp > 0 && (!ctl->fetchall || ctl->server.uidl))
     {
 	int fastuidl;
 	char id [IDLEN+1];
@@ -902,6 +902,7 @@
 	/* should we do fast uidl this time? */
 	fastuidl = ctl->fastuidl;
 	if (*countp > 7 &&		/* linear search is better if there are few mails! */
+	    !ctl->fetchall &&		/* with fetchall, all uids are required */
 	    !ctl->flush &&		/* with flush, it is safer to disable fastuidl */
 	    NUM_NONZERO (fastuidl))
 	{
================================================================

> The best option would be to use UIDL. Still we'll not be forcing UIDL
> downloads to use RETR in 6.3.X. We can safely do that in 6.4.X: the
> 6.3.X manpage already has warnings in place.

...

> > I don't get this part. If the pop3 server is supporting UIDL and
> > fetchmail is running with the "uidl" option, why bother about the LAST
> > pointer and message flags?
> 
> Why bother? Because I promised I'd stop the ESR madness of gold versions
> and promised 6.3.X would be compatible with 6.3.0 when I released 6.3.0.

Ok.

-- 
Sunil Shetye.