Mailing List Archive

On 2023.07.28 20:29, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I've been a loyal user of KMail for many years. (Loyal? Masochistic
> might be a
> better word.) It suits me exactly - or it would if it were reliable.
> It isn't,
> though, which drives me to consider alternatives.
>
> Claws mail is often mentioned hereabouts, and I'd like to try it, but
> first I'd
> need to export KMail's 20-odd-year maildir history to mbox format. Is
> it
> enough to run KMail's Import/Export Data tool to do this? It should
> be, on the
> face of it, but I'm suspicious (consider me paranoid if you like).
I've been a happy user of Balsa for many years. It reads maildir as
is, no conversion necessary. Can also use mbox and other formats, and
does IMAP as well as POP3.

Jack

On Sat, 29 Jul 2023 01:29:59 +0100
Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

> Hello list,
>
> I've been a loyal user of KMail for many years. (Loyal? Masochistic
> might be a better word.) It suits me exactly - or it would if it were
> reliable. It isn't, though, which drives me to consider alternatives.
>
> Claws mail is often mentioned hereabouts, and I'd like to try it, but
> first I'd need to export KMail's 20-odd-year maildir history to mbox
> format. Is it enough to run KMail's Import/Export Data tool to do
> this? It should be, on the face of it, but I'm suspicious (consider
> me paranoid if you like).

User of Claws with a local maildir here. One mail per file always
felt safer to me. If you do want to keep using maildir,
net-mail/dovecot provides IMAP access to ~/.maildir out of the box,
and I've found this combination to be reliable.

Since it's "just" local IMAP, moving data in and out can be done with
most mail clients. Plus it means you're not tied to a single mail
client going forward.

I do miss KMail's breadth of features though. Never tried it's
migration tools, sorry.

Cheers,
Bryan

230729 Peter Humphrey wrote:
> I've been a loyal user of KMail for many years.
> Claws mail is often mentioned hereabouts and I'd like to try it,
> but first I'd need to export KMail's 20-odd-year maildir history
> to mbox format.

I recommend a look at Mutt, which I've used very happily since c 1998 ,
well before Gentoo existed. I've also always used Mbox, not Maildir.
Powerful, configurable, but also simple : the UNIX approach.

--
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT ___________//___, Philip Webb
ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT `-O----------O---' purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

On Sat, 29 Jul 2023 01:29:59 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> Claws mail is often mentioned hereabouts, and I'd like to try it, but
> first I'd need to export KMail's 20-odd-year maildir history to mbox
> format. Is it enough to run KMail's Import/Export Data tool to do this?
> It should be, on the face of it, but I'm suspicious (consider me
> paranoid if you like).

Claws works with maildir. However, I'd also recommend setting up Dovecot
locally, then you can try as many mail clients as you want without having
to worry about where the mails are sotred or in what format.


--
Neil Bothwick

If nothing sticks to Teflon, how do they stick teflon on the pan?

On 29/07/2023 03:37, Bryan Gardiner wrote:
> User of Claws with a local maildir here. One mail per file always
> felt safer to me. If you do want to keep using maildir,
> net-mail/dovecot provides IMAP access to ~/.maildir out of the box,
> and I've found this combination to be reliable.

Just a tip which bit me when I first installed dovecot ...

The master config file actually chain-loads a local config file, make
sure you use it. I edited the master file directly, so of course the
first update overwrote and trashed it ...

Cheers,
Wol

On Saturday, 29 July 2023 01:29:59 BST Peter Humphrey wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I've been a loyal user of KMail for many years. (Loyal? Masochistic might be
> a better word.) It suits me exactly - or it would if it were reliable. It
> isn't, though, which drives me to consider alternatives.

I've been using Kmail since the good ol' KDE3 days. Back then it worked at
least as good if not better than any other mail client I had tried. With the
move to KDE4, Kmail became the worse mail client I have ever used. I mean,
*catastrophically* worse! Both for the messages involved and for my nerves.
Initially I blamed sqlite, which I was using as its back end for a season, but
things were not much better with mysql. At some point I tried postgresql,
which was more robust. Over the years the code matured. For some years now,
Kmail is quite stable. There are still a couple of glitches with its GUI,
e.g. the columns width has a mind of its own and recently its Korganizer
sister application notifications cannot be snoozed for a short period of time,
but overall it works without any drama.


> Claws mail is often mentioned hereabouts, and I'd like to try it, but first
> I'd need to export KMail's 20-odd-year maildir history to mbox format.

Among many other email applications, I gave Claws a spin. A couple of months
later I abandoned it, because I ended up spending more time trying to bend it
out of shape to behave like Kmail (from keybindings, to layout, to
attachments, etc.) than I was spending using it. Soon, my attempts to change
its behaviour hit a wall of non-adjustable hardcoded features. I don't blame
Claws for this, rather my brain which had been accustomed to work with Kmail.

The mbox single file format is something I tried to move away from since the
90s, because as it grows in size it becomes more prone to corruption. Losing
one message may be tolerable, but losing the lot less so. Sure, backups exist
for a reason, but why accept architectural weaknesses if there is the more
modern alternative of maildir?


> Is
> it enough to run KMail's Import/Export Data tool to do this? It should be,
> on the face of it, but I'm suspicious (consider me paranoid if you like).

I'll echo the recommendation for dovecot, plus backup(s). If things go
sideways during your experiment, you can rinse and repeat. This is just good
practice.

That said, I have used the Kmail Import/Export data tool in the past to move
messages between Kmail and Thunderbird. It worked, but can't recall the
details.

Wols Lists <antlists@youngman.org.uk> writes:

> On 29/07/2023 03:37, Bryan Gardiner wrote:
>> User of Claws with a local maildir here. One mail per file always
>> felt safer to me. If you do want to keep using maildir,
>> net-mail/dovecot provides IMAP access to ~/.maildir out of the box,
>> and I've found this combination to be reliable.
>
> Just a tip which bit me when I first installed dovecot ...
>
> The master config file actually chain-loads a local config file, make sure you
> use it. I edited the master file directly, so of course the first update
> overwrote and trashed it ...

That should not happen. Where's the master config file? Is it under a
directory masked by CONFIG_PROTECT?

~$ portageq envvar CONFIG_PROTECT
/etc /usr/share/config

... on my machine (re-run on yours to check)

> Cheers,
> Wol

--
Arsen Arsenovi?

On Saturday, 29 July 2023 07:56:21 BST Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2023 01:29:59 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Claws mail is often mentioned hereabouts, and I'd like to try it, but
> > first I'd need to export KMail's 20-odd-year maildir history to mbox
> > format. Is it enough to run KMail's Import/Export Data tool to do this?
> > It should be, on the face of it, but I'm suspicious (consider me
> > paranoid if you like).
>
> Claws works with maildir. However, I'd also recommend setting up Dovecot
> locally, then you can try as many mail clients as you want without having
> to worry about where the mails are sotred or in what format.

Hm. I already have Dovecot on my LAN server, because KMail is horribly buggy
with POP3, which is what my ISP offers. So fetchmail -> postfix -> dovecot
became necessary before I could use IMAP4 in KMail.

All incoming emails are transferred to my workstation because I like to have
everything in one place and one backup.

Maybe I'll stick with KMail a bit longer...

--
Regards,
Peter.

On 29/07/2023 11:13, Arsen Arsenovi? wrote:
> Wols Lists<antlists@youngman.org.uk> writes:
>
>> On 29/07/2023 03:37, Bryan Gardiner wrote:
>>> User of Claws with a local maildir here. One mail per file always
>>> felt safer to me. If you do want to keep using maildir,
>>> net-mail/dovecot provides IMAP access to ~/.maildir out of the box,
>>> and I've found this combination to be reliable.
>> Just a tip which bit me when I first installed dovecot ...
>>
>> The master config file actually chain-loads a local config file, make sure you
>> use it. I edited the master file directly, so of course the first update
>> overwrote and trashed it ...

> That should not happen. Where's the master config file? Is it under a
> directory masked by CONFIG_PROTECT?

And then the dovecot maintainers update things, update the config file,
and it breaks for all users because the config version no longer matches
the program version ...

The master config file is in the obvious place -
/etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf. Just like postfix breaks exactly the same way
- /etc/postfix/main.cf.

Imho dovecot has got this (almost) exactly right. Just like systemd. You
have your master file that is updated by the distro, and you have your
local file that is updated by the sys admin.

dovecot.conf points to a file local.conf, which does not error if it
doesn't exist, but over-rides dovecot.conf if it does. The proper way to
do it!

Unlike postfix - where I can't find a place to split my local config
away from the default config - so every time postfix is updated I have
to make sure it doesn't try to update main.cf !!!

Cheers,
Wol

On 29/07/2023 12:01, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> Hm. I already have Dovecot on my LAN server, because KMail is horribly buggy
> with POP3, which is what my ISP offers. So fetchmail -> postfix -> dovecot
> became necessary before I could use IMAP4 in KMail.
>
> All incoming emails are transferred to my workstation because I like to have
> everything in one place and one backup.
>
> Maybe I'll stick with KMail a bit longer...

Well then, install Claws and try it - just point it at Dovecot. Okay, I
use Thunderbird, but there's no reason I have to - I run about 4
different instances of TB, all pointing at my Dovecot server, and all
mail is visible on all my computers - the server/workstation, my old
laptop, my new laptop, my wife's laptop when I borrow it, ...

Cheers,
Wol

Wols Lists <antlists@youngman.org.uk> writes:

> On 29/07/2023 11:13, Arsen Arsenovi? wrote:
>> Wols Lists<antlists@youngman.org.uk> writes:
>>
>>> On 29/07/2023 03:37, Bryan Gardiner wrote:
>>>> User of Claws with a local maildir here. One mail per file always
>>>> felt safer to me. If you do want to keep using maildir,
>>>> net-mail/dovecot provides IMAP access to ~/.maildir out of the box,
>>>> and I've found this combination to be reliable.
>>> Just a tip which bit me when I first installed dovecot ...
>>>
>>> The master config file actually chain-loads a local config file, make sure you
>>> use it. I edited the master file directly, so of course the first update
>>> overwrote and trashed it ...
>
>> That should not happen. Where's the master config file? Is it under a
>> directory masked by CONFIG_PROTECT?
>
> And then the dovecot maintainers update things, update the config file, and it
> breaks for all users because the config version no longer matches the program
> version ...

I don't recall Dovecot configs being version sensitive.

> The master config file is in the obvious place -
> /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf. Just like postfix breaks exactly the same way -
> /etc/postfix/main.cf.

Then that should not have been overwritten.

> Imho dovecot has got this (almost) exactly right. Just like systemd. You have
> your master file that is updated by the distro, and you have your local file
> that is updated by the sys admin.
>
> dovecot.conf points to a file local.conf, which does not error if it doesn't
> exist, but over-rides dovecot.conf if it does. The proper way to do it!

I agree, but this is still suspicious. CONFIG_PROTECT should've
prevented that, and offered dispatch-conf instead.

> Unlike postfix - where I can't find a place to split my local config away from
> the default config - so every time postfix is updated I have to make sure it
> doesn't try to update main.cf !!!

Again, it shouldn't be able to do that. Please check CONFIG_PROTECT
using: portageq envvar CONFIG_PROTECT

It should, normally, contain /etc, set by profiles/base/make.defaults.

Have a lovely day.
--
Arsen Arsenovi?

On 29/07/2023 14:54, Arsen Arsenovi? wrote:
> Again, it shouldn't be able to do that. Please check CONFIG_PROTECT
> using: portageq envvar CONFIG_PROTECT
>
> It should, normally, contain /etc, set by profiles/base/make.defaults.

And here is the root of the mis-understanding between us. And also why
Dovecot does it right, and Postfix does it wrong.

WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO USE DISPATCH-CONF? (Or in my case, etc-update.)

The point is I don't (have to) care whether dovecot.conf is updated or
not. I never change it from the distro defaults, so it never offers me
etc-update, and it never does any damage.

But I DO have to care about postfix/main.cf. This makes the fundamental
blunder of mixing distro defaults and local config in the SAME FILE. So
yes it does offer me etc-update. But if I MISS THAT, I've just trashed
my local config and have to rebuild it.

At the end of the day, if you can't keep distro and local config
separate, that's a fault of the upstream application. etc-update and
dispatch-conf are gentoo's way of working round the breakage. IFF you
use dovecot/local.conf, it's a sign of good design by the upstream
application, and etc-update or dispatch-conf are completely UNNECESSARY.

Cheers,
Wol

Wols Lists <antlists@youngman.org.uk> writes:

> On 29/07/2023 14:54, Arsen Arsenovi? wrote:
>> Again, it shouldn't be able to do that. Please check CONFIG_PROTECT
>> using: portageq envvar CONFIG_PROTECT
>> It should, normally, contain /etc, set by profiles/base/make.defaults.
>
> And here is the root of the mis-understanding between us. And also why Dovecot
> does it right, and Postfix does it wrong.
>
> WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO USE DISPATCH-CONF? (Or in my case, etc-update.)
>
> The point is I don't (have to) care whether dovecot.conf is updated or not. I
> never change it from the distro defaults, so it never offers me etc-update, and
> it never does any damage.
>
> But I DO have to care about postfix/main.cf. This makes the fundamental blunder
> of mixing distro defaults and local config in the SAME FILE. So yes it does
> offer me etc-update. But if I MISS THAT, I've just trashed my local config and
> have to rebuild it.

If portage trashes the local file, something went wrong. That is the
only thing that I'm trying to get to the bottom of in this thread.
Application design is irrelevant to that.

You say that the opportunity to etc-update is offered? If so, portage
worked as it should and I'm satisfied, but I'm still confused about how
the contents got trashed.

> At the end of the day, if you can't keep distro and local config separate,
> that's a fault of the upstream application. etc-update and dispatch-conf are
> gentoo's way of working round the breakage. IFF you use dovecot/local.conf,
> it's a sign of good design by the upstream application, and etc-update or
> dispatch-conf are completely UNNECESSARY.
>
> Cheers,
> Wol


--
Arsen Arsenovi?

On 29/07/2023 15:50, Arsen Arsenovi? wrote:
>> But I DO have to care about postfix/main.cf. This makes the fundamental blunder
>> of mixing distro defaults and local config in the SAME FILE. So yes it does
>> offer me etc-update. But if I MISS THAT, I've just trashed my local config and
>> have to rebuild it.
> If portage trashes the local file, something went wrong. That is the
> only thing that I'm trying to get to the bottom of in this thread.
> Application design is irrelevant to that.
>
> You say that the opportunity to etc-update is offered? If so, portage
> worked as it should and I'm satisfied, but I'm still confused about how
> the contents got trashed.
>
Because - with dovecot - I initially made the mistake of editing the
global file. etc-update over-wrote it.

With postfix, I cannot see any way of NOT editing the global file.

If you go back to what started all this, it was me advising the OP to
make sure he edited the dovecot local file, not the global one.

And yes, portage is working as it should, but it is working to mitigate
breakage in the upstream application, namely postfix. Stuff it should
not need to do.

Cheers,
Wol

Am Sat, Jul 29, 2023 at 01:53:21AM -0400 schrieb Philip Webb:
> 230729 Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > I've been a loyal user of KMail for many years.
> > Claws mail is often mentioned hereabouts and I'd like to try it,
> > but first I'd need to export KMail's 20-odd-year maildir history
> > to mbox format.
>
> I recommend a look at Mutt, which I've used very happily since c 1998 ,
> well before Gentoo existed. I've also always used Mbox, not Maildir.
> Powerful, configurable, but also simple : the UNIX approach.

When I had kmail issues back in the day of early akonadi times (remember
Alan’s thread about data loss from then?), I tried out mutt and I’ve been
using it ever since. I configured it to my liking re. list layout, sidebar,
shortcuts, editing and so on.

I still use KMail these days, quite often too. But it has a few drawbacks
and annoying little bugs that I encounter regularly, which is one reason for
staying with mutt. Another is that mutt is much much faster when dealing
with big directories such as lists. Still, there is no better graphical
alternative in KDE land. Thunderbird & Co don’t fit in optically, Trojita is
too limited.

--
Grüße | Greetings | Salut | Qapla’
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.

When things went bonkers for the captain, he had the entire ship jettisoned.

On Sunday, 30 July 2023 13:07:52 BST Frank Steinmetzger wrote:

> When I had kmail issues back in the day of early akonadi times (remember
> Alan’s thread about data loss from then?), I tried out mutt and I’ve been
> using it ever since. I configured it to my liking re. list layout, sidebar,
> shortcuts, editing and so on.

I haven't used Mutt in this century. I assume it's still similar in
appearance.

> I still use KMail these days, quite often too. But it has a few drawbacks
> and annoying little bugs that I encounter regularly, which is one reason for
> staying with mutt. Another is that mutt is much much faster when dealing
> with big directories such as lists. Still, there is no better graphical
> alternative in KDE land. Thunderbird & Co don’t fit in optically, Trojita
> is too limited.

Agreed. A glance at Thunderbird was enough. Never heard of Trojita.

Thanks all for the advice.

--
Regards,
Peter.

On Sat, 29 Jul 2023 12:23:47 +0100, Wols Lists wrote:

> > Hm. I already have Dovecot on my LAN server, because KMail is
> > horribly buggy with POP3, which is what my ISP offers. So fetchmail
> > -> postfix -> dovecot became necessary before I could use IMAP4 in
> > KMail.
> >
> > All incoming emails are transferred to my workstation because I like
> > to have everything in one place and one backup.
> >
> > Maybe I'll stick with KMail a bit longer...
>
> Well then, install Claws and try it - just point it at Dovecot. Okay, I
> use Thunderbird, but there's no reason I have to - I run about 4
> different instances of TB, all pointing at my Dovecot server, and all
> mail is visible on all my computers - the server/workstation, my old
> laptop, my new laptop, my wife's laptop when I borrow it, ...

Similarly, I use Claws 99% of the time, but occasionally run Thunderbird.
Neither program cares that I have also used the other to read my mail.


--
Neil Bothwick

"If Micro built cars, the worlds population would be in decline"

On Sunday, 30 July 2023 20:02:47 BST Neil Bothwick wrote:

> ... I use Claws 99% of the time, but occasionally run Thunderbird. Neither
> program cares that I have also used the other to read my mail.

Ah, but you're using IMAP4 and leaving your emails on the server. I don't want
to do that.

--
Regards,
Peter.

On Sun, 30 Jul 2023 23:53:39 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> > ... I use Claws 99% of the time, but occasionally run Thunderbird.
> > Neither program cares that I have also used the other to read my
> > mail.
>
> Ah, but you're using IMAP4 and leaving your emails on the server. I
> don't want to do that.

But you're running the IMAP server locally, so what difference does it
make?


--
Neil Bothwick

Feminism: the radical notion that women are people.

On Sat, 2023-07-29 at 01:29 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> I've been a loyal user of KMail for many years. (Loyal? Masochistic
> might be a better word.) It suits me exactly - or it would if it were
> reliable. It isn't, though, which drives me to consider alternatives.

To present an alternative that I haven't seen mentioned in the thread:
Evolution.  

- Fully featured (calendar, contacts, tasks, memos)
- Oauth2 support
- Exchange Web Services support
- sane defaults
- sqlite database storage (as opposed to Akonadi's mysql)
- active community mailing list.

On 31/07/2023 00:11, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2023 23:53:39 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>
>>> ... I use Claws 99% of the time, but occasionally run Thunderbird.
>>> Neither program cares that I have also used the other to read my
>>> mail.
>>
>> Ah, but you're using IMAP4 and leaving your emails on the server. I
>> don't want to do that.
>
> But you're running the IMAP server locally, so what difference does it
> make?
>
My server IS my workstation. And if *you* don't want to leave your mail
"centrally", why are you running a dovecot server?

Cheers,
Wol

On Monday, 31 July 2023 08:34:05 BST Wols Lists wrote:
> On 31/07/2023 00:11, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Sun, 30 Jul 2023 23:53:39 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> >>> ... I use Claws 99% of the time, but occasionally run Thunderbird.
> >>> Neither program cares that I have also used the other to read my
> >>> mail.
> >>
> >> Ah, but you're using IMAP4 and leaving your emails on the server. I
> >> don't want to do that.
> >
> > But you're running the IMAP server locally, so what difference does it
> > make?

It's just the way things have 'just growed'. I could start again with the
server keeping the mails itself, but it's a good deal of work.

> My server IS my workstation. And if *you* don't want to leave your mail
> "centrally", why are you running a dovecot server?

Because KMail is horribly buggy with POP3 and my ISP doesn't offer IMAP4.

--
Regards,
Peter.

On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 13:33:18 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> > > But you're running the IMAP server locally, so what difference does
> > > it make?
>
> It's just the way things have 'just growed'. I could start again with
> the server keeping the mails itself, but it's a good deal of work.

Not really. Once you have set up the server and a folder for it in KMail,
you just move your mails from the local folder to the IMAP one.


--
Neil Bothwick

I can't walk on water, but I can stagger on alcohol.

On 31/07/2023 13:33, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Monday, 31 July 2023 08:34:05 BST Wols Lists wrote:
>> On 31/07/2023 00:11, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>> On Sun, 30 Jul 2023 23:53:39 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>>>>> ... I use Claws 99% of the time, but occasionally run Thunderbird.
>>>>> Neither program cares that I have also used the other to read my
>>>>> mail.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, but you're using IMAP4 and leaving your emails on the server. I
>>>> don't want to do that.
>>>
>>> But you're running the IMAP server locally, so what difference does it
>>> make?
>
> It's just the way things have 'just growed'. I could start again with the
> server keeping the mails itself, but it's a good deal of work.
>
>> My server IS my workstation. And if *you* don't want to leave your mail
>> "centrally", why are you running a dovecot server?
>
> Because KMail is horribly buggy with POP3 and my ISP doesn't offer IMAP4.
>
I'm trying to get my head round your setup then.

My setup is simple. I couldn't get postfix/fetchmail to behave, so my
workstation/server runs dovecot.

Thunderbird (on my server) has an account pointing at my ISP, that
retrieves all my mail and moves it into dovecot. Am I right you've got
postfix/fetchmail working correctly? All you need to do is make it chuck
it into dovecot on your server (or not even that).

But the point is, if you have a working instance of dovecot, and you are
using kmail/imap4 to read your emails FROM DOVECOT, just point claws at
dovecot as well.

Or are you using kmail/pop3 to pull your emails from dovecot into your
local kmail instance?

The big question that needs answering is "Are you storing your emails in
dovecot, or in kmail?"

Cheers,
Wol