[7509] in SIPB bug reports
Re: fyi: pine4 soon coming to sipb locker
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Hawkinson)
Mon Mar 20 18:45:09 2000
Message-Id: <200003202342.SAA09494@mary-kay-commandos.mit.edu>
To: Jacob Morzinski <jmorzins@MIT.EDU>
Cc: bug-sipb@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 20 Mar 2000 00:38:44 EST."
<Pine.NEB.4.21L.0003200026560.11544-100000@lola-granola.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 18:42:46 -0500
From: John Hawkinson <jhawk@MIT.EDU>
>Cross-platform file locking in afs Does Not Work. It works fine
>on a single machine protecting you agains other pine invocations
>on that machine, but I can establish three simultaneous locks on
>my inbox if I use three different machines.
Discussion with Sam suggests that at least one of the 3 locking
methods should work. We should look into this before giving up.
>I am tempted to time peoples pines out after 2 or 3 hours, to
>give themselves less chance to hurt themselves, but have held off
>so far because I dislike this "solution".
Well, how badly would they hurt themselves? Is pine configured
to use an mh-style mailbox?
>> >servers, BE AWARE that pine will contact the KPOP port of the
>> >server and pull all your mail into afs when you run pine.
>>
>> Why is this contingent on use of the new PO servers?
>
>The new PO servers are the first time that MIT has supported
>having mail permanently stored in people's "KPOP" account.
>Anyone who has been previously using pine has (probably) been
>using the pine-inc script, but hypothetical testers reading this
>mail might have been storing their mail on the server.
Err, but won't the old and new po servers look the same to pine
as long as it is using KPOP? Or have you set it up to check hesiod
and conditionally use IMAP?
--jhawk
