this is a de-optimization, but it makes the code consistent with the
other sections (which do not use the shortcut due to having to
post-process the data or being encapsulated by a function call).
that's mostly hypothetical, but let's not make assumptions.
this also adds EXPUNGE response handling to make total_msgs reliable. in
principle, this affects the post-SELECT UIDNEXT fallback as well, but
there the racing window is so short that this barely improves anything.
amends 94022a67.
the uidnext query following message stores can be interleaved with
message fetches. that means that we cannot rely on the 1st command in
flight being that query. but instead of iterating over all commands in
flight, move the uidnext query flag to imap_store (and make sure to
check for the presence of a message body before testing it) - this
avoids the loop and an extra byte in every command.
this also makes it clear that the query is mutually exclusive with
loading messages (the untagged responses are not distinguishable).
don't say DRV_CANCELED when it's really DRV_STORE_BAD, as apart from
being just wrong, it lead to the confusing effect of canceling a store
as the result of a supposed cancellation of the same store.
properly distribute the certificates between the SSL context's trust
store and our host cert list.
as a drive-by, clean up some nasty type casts at the cost of including
a second OpenSSL header into socket.h.
delay reporting success of STORE FLAGS until a subsequent CHECK
succeeds.
this fixes (inverse flag change propagation) and (deletes not being
propagated) after an interruption due to prematurely logged flag
updates.
delay the creation of the new state and journal until there is actually
something interesting to write. this saves some cpu cycles and prolongs
ssd life a whee bit.
now that expiration order is determined by a single loop ordered by
far-side UIDs, it is no longer necessary to accurately track the highest
seen UID.
as a side effect, this fixes a problem reported (way too long ago) by
Yuri D'Elia: we failed to up newmaxuid for messages we produced
ourselves, so we would keep enumerating the same messages until we also
propagated externally generated messages from that mailbox - which might
have been never for the server side of archive/trash mailboxes.
we can do that, as unpaired near-side messages are ignored anyway.
this mildly changes expiration order, as near-side messages that
existed for a long time but were propagated much later will be expired
later. however, that has no practical relevance.
this is mostly theoretical, as at this point no updates to the message
list can have actually happened. but it's future-proof and consistent
with the near-side loop.
we already didn't propagate messages which would be instantly expunged
from the target, but failed to cancel propagations that were already
scheduled before we got interrupted. this matters a bit when the
resumption happens significantly later than the initial attempt, giving
the user time to mark messages on the source as deleted.
the 'pending' and 'skipped' sync record states are mutually exclusive
with having a complementary message, so there is no point in testing it
explicitly.
amends bd5fb6ff.
we need to pass a different "boundary" UID to driver_t::load_box() for
every OPEN_* flag that queries a partial range:
- OPEN_FIND refers to messages newer than all we know about
- OPEN_OLD_IDS refers to messages which are paired
- OPEN_{OLD,NEW}_SIZE refers to messages (not) above the committed
boundary of already propagated messages
we treated the 3rd like the 2nd, which was just wrong - the actual
boundary may be lower or higher, so we'd produce wrong results when
MaxSize was set and only one of New and ReNew was requested.
the underlying metaphor refers to an inhumane practice, so using it
casually is rightfully offensive to many people. it isn't even a
particularly apt metaphor, as it suggests a strict hierarchy that is
counter to mbsync's highly symmetrical mode of operation.
the far/near terminology has been chosen as the replacement, as it is a
natural fit for the push/pull terminology. on the downside, due to these
not being nouns, a few uses are a bit awkward, and several others had to
be amended to include 'side'. also, it's conceptually quite close to
remote/local, which matches the typical use case, but is maybe a bit too
suggestive of actually non-existing limitations.
the new f/n suffixes of the -C/-R/-X options clash with pre-existing
options, so direct concatenation of short options is even less practical
than before (some suffixes of -D already clashed), but doing that leads
to unreadable command lines anyway.
as with previous deprecations, all pre-existing command line and config
options keep working, but yield a warning. the state files are silently
upgraded.
this is better than using PassCmd, as it allows the keychain manager to
identify the calling process and therefore use a selective whitelist.
unlike in the now removed example, we use an "internet password" for the
imap protocol, rather than a "generic password" - this seems more
appropriate.
based on a patch by Oliver Runge <oliver.runge@gmail.com>
It was already possible to retrieve passwords from arbitrary commands.
But this goes only half the way to allowing automated derivation of
login credentials, as some environments may also have different user
names based on the system. Therefore, add the UserCmd option to
complement PassCmd.
Based on a patch series by Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
makes the code less cluttered, and it's harder to introduce leaks.
this has the hypothetical disadvantage that due to freeing being
delayed, the peak memory usage would rise significantly if we chained to
another parse_list() call which produces a big list while already
holding a big list, but that isn't the case anywhere.
... by making a lot of objects unsigned, and some signed.
casts which lose precision and change the sign in one go (ssize_t and
time_t to uint on LP64) are made explicit as well.
this does specifically *not* cover about a bazillion warnings about
size_t being shrunk to uint - these make no sense given the expected
data set size.
