Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 178683
Possible mbox corruption with 0.99.x versions
Last modified: 2007-12-19 23:31:46 EST
Description of problem: http://wiki.dovecot.org/MboxProblems mentions a possible data corruption that could add an empty line at the beginning of an mbox, making it unusable. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 0.99.14-1.EL4 I have scoured the dovecot CVS, and cannot find a particular commit fixing this problem, only other refactorings which most likely fix this problem. The easiest fix would be to upgrade to version 1.0 of dovecot.
I see and i am gradually working on getting 1.0 beta 2 into rhel4. First pass is getting it into fc5 and then fc4 updates. Depending on the issues we encounter, we will see if it is doable for rhel4.
Moving to RHEL 4.5 Proposed. This is really a request to rebase to ver 1.0
I've found a note in dovecot.org: http://wiki.dovecot.org/MboxProblems Empty line at the beginning of mbox This is an unsolved rarely occurring bug in 0.99.x Dovecot versions. Use 1.0 releases instead. OK, it rarely occurs, but it happens, and it needs to be fixed. Any news on this issue?
This issue tends to bite my users in the form of Trash corruption. Any hope of getting 1.0 in RHEL sometime soon?
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has requested further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update release.
Development Management has reviewed and declined this request. You may appeal this decision by reopening this request.
Does this mean that RedHat will try to fix 0.99.x for the mbox corruption?
Later versions of RHEL have had dovecot updated to 1.0. Why not EL4? We are experiencing multiple problems with our mail system, all of which are fixed by dovecot 1.0. Having gone through >30 release candidates it must be much more stable than the .99 version currently included.
Looking for an answer to comment 12.
Tom, the 1.0 version has very different configuration and probably even the behavior wrt indexes etc. -- there's no way we can rebase to 1.0 at this phase of RHEL4. (I'm sorry to say this, I know that 0.99 is more or less broken but it's just not possible)