Version: 1.8.2 (using KDE KDE 3.5.1) Installed from: SuSE RPMs Compiler: gcc version 4.0.2 20050901 (prerelease) (SUSE Linux) Installed KMail via RPMs in SuSE 9.3 OS: Linux KMail updates its flags by issuing a UID FETCH 1:* FLAGS. After this response, it fetches messages with UID 2006:*, and because message UID 2005 is the largest message, the IMAP server returns only this (in IMAP, * = max message number, and 2006:2005 == 2005 if there is no 2006). It looks like KMail is confused by this response, because it promptly does a refresh of the entire mailbox by fetching 0:2005. Bug 1: UID 0 - that's a protocol error. There is no such thing in IMAP. Bug 2: It shouldn't have done the full refresh in the first place. :-) Protocol dump: * 1714 FETCH (UID 2004 FLAGS (\Seen \Recent))<CR><LF> * 1714 FETCH (FLAGS (\Seen \Recent))<CR><LF> * 1715 FETCH (UID 2005 FLAGS (\Recent))<CR><LF> 88139 OK FETCH completed<CR><LF> 88140 UID FETCH 2006:* (UID RFC822.SIZE FLAGS ENVELOPE BODY.PEEK[HEADER.FIELDS (REFERENCES)])<CR><LF> * 1715 FETCH (UID 2005 RFC822.SIZE 2708 FLAGS (\Recent) ENVELOPE ("Mon, 29 May 2006 14:34:17 +0900" "Fw: (Hopefully)temporally block-out of my KO account" ((NIL NIL "Takayasu_Fukui" "jetro.go.jp")) ((NIL NIL "Takayasu_Fukui" "jetro.go.jp")) ((NIL NIL "Takayasu_Fukui" "jetro.go.jp")) ((NIL NIL "fktac" "hotmail.com")) NIL NIL NIL "<OF0A119772.9197A33F-ON4925717D.001E7FB4-4925717D.001EB0FA@jetro.go.jp>") BODY[HEADER.FIELDS ("REFERENCES")] {2}<CR><LF> <CR><LF> )<CR><LF> 88140 OK FETCH completed<CR><LF> 88141 UID FETCH 0,2005 (UID RFC822.SIZE FLAGS ENVELOPE BODY.PEEK[HEADER.FIELDS (REFERENCES)])<CR><LF> * NO Expected sequence set after FETCH SPACE<CR><LF>
> Bug 1: UID 0 - that's a protocol error. There is no such thing in IMAP. Nearly, the error is that the kioslave requests 0,2005 (the comma is the problem). > Bug 2: It shouldn't have done the full refresh in the first place. :-) Good catch! I wonder how you reproduce this behaviour. The 2006 was the highest UID so you must have deleted this messages before. Is that correct? Carsten
On Monday 29 May 2006 14:43, Carsten Burghardt wrote: [bugs.kde.org quoted mail] Perhaps, but the comma is perfectly fine. That simply means that the client requested message 0 and 2005. But 0 is invalid. So maybe this is several bugs ;-). > > Bug 2: It shouldn't have done the full refresh in the first place. :-) > Good catch! > I wonder how you reproduce this behaviour. The 2006 was the highest UID so > you must have deleted this messages before. Is that correct? Indeed. It's very hard to reproduce; I'm running KMail against Binc IMAP v1.2.13b2. It happens so seldomly that I've set up a protocol log constantly at work to catch it when it happens. It does seem to happen right after I delete a message, and after KMail refreshes its flags. Andreas
On Monday 29 May 2006 14:43, Carsten Burghardt wrote: [bugs.kde.org quoted mail] BTW, can you please scramble my friend's email address from the protocol dump? Thanks. Andreas
Thank you for taking the time to file a bug report. KMail2 was released in 2011, and the entire code base went through significant changes. We are currently in the process of porting to Qt5 and KF5. It is unlikely that these bugs are still valid in KMail2. We welcome you to try out KMail 2 with the KDE 4.14 release and give your feedback.