dovecot - Aug 2006 - Dovecot imap with Postfix and using Thunderbird as client

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone knew of the mysterious fix to this problem that 
Curtis describes in his followup:
"I vaguely remember something like this, but I don't recall the
fix"

I recently installed dovecot on a server running RHEL4-AS-U2 and have updated 
to RHEL latest dovecot package, dovecot-0.99.11-2.EL4.1.

Seeing as this is close to the version Curtis is running (dovecot-0.99.14) I 
was wondering if anyone had some insights.

There seems to be a Thunderbird specific problem when trying to retrieve 
messages from the server. Other imap clients (Mac OSX Mail, squirrelmail, etc) 
don't experience this problem, however Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 experiences it on
Linux, Mac OSX and Windows boxes.

In thunderbird, new messages don't reliably appear and the retrieval button 
doesn't work when new mail is present. Clicking on an email which isn't
cached
retrieves new ones as well as waiting around an hour to retrieve messages.

Thanks in advance for any insight you can provide.

Shawn
Curtis Maloney wrote:
> Ben Ware wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I just recently installed dovecot, and I am having the following
problem:
>> If I send an email to my account on this new machine, I can log in via
SSH
>> and use the unix mail command, and instantly my email is visible.  If I
turn
>> on Thunderbird, it will show my new message.  If Thunderbird was
already on
>> and had already checked the mailbox, even if I click on get new mail
for
>> that specific mailbox, the new mail does not show up until I restart 
>> thunderbird.  Is there something that I have set wrong in the config
files
>> that is preventing the IMAP part of dovecot from refreshing the
messages
>> quickly for me to see?  I dont see anything in the log files at all
except
>> for it showing me logging in.
>> Thanks,
>> Ben
> 
> I am using pretty much the same setup - Dovecot (0.99.14), Postfix and 
> Thunderbird.  I vaguely remember something like this, but I don't
recall the
> fix.  What happens when you click on another folder, and back to the folder
> with the new mail?  Does it show then?
> 
> -- 
> Curtis Maloney

Shawn Needham wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I was wondering if anyone knew of the mysterious fix to this problem 
> that Curtis describes in his followup:
> "I vaguely remember something like this, but I don't recall the
fix"
> 
> I recently installed dovecot on a server running RHEL4-AS-U2 and have 
> updated to RHEL latest dovecot package, dovecot-0.99.11-2.EL4.1.
Aside from the myriad bugs that were fixed since this, the blanket 
recommendation now is to use a 1.0 series release, as it is far superior, not 
the least because it is still supported, unlike the 0.99 series.

Yes, I know I'm still running 0.99.14 myself, but that's because I
haven't had
time to upgrade :(  Fortunately, recent additions by Timo (bless his cotton 
socks!) have made this process even simpler.
> 
> Seeing as this is close to the version Curtis is running 
> (dovecot-0.99.14) I was wondering if anyone had some insights.
> 
> There seems to be a Thunderbird specific problem when trying to retrieve 
> messages from the server. Other imap clients (Mac OSX Mail, 
> squirrelmail, etc) don't experience this problem, however Thunderbird 
> 1.5.0.5 experiences it on Linux, Mac OSX and Windows boxes.
If you can't upgrade to 1.0, at least upgrade to 0.99.14... if your distro 
doesn't provide a package, build it yourself.  It really is simple.

Then tell your distro off for not providing newer versions.
> In thunderbird, new messages don't reliably appear and the retrieval 
> button doesn't work when new mail is present. Clicking on an email
which
> isn't cached retrieves new ones as well as waiting around an hour to 
> retrieve messages.
I just had a quick shufti at the ChangeLog in 0.99.14, and there's any
number of
fixes between 0.99.11 and 0.99.14 that could be related.  Again, since nobody 
supports 0.99 any more, it's unlikely anyone remembers which one
specifically
fixed the issue.

All I can tell you is that TB has been working fine on 0.99.14 for a long time
here.
> Thanks in advance for any insight you can provide.
> 
--
Curtis Maloney
cmaloney at cardgate.net