Re: Does KMail require Akonadi? (was: Re: Frustrating to use KMail with Akonadi 5.14.1 (20.04))

Ingo Klöcker <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.kde.users.pim
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Donnerstag, 2. Juli 2020 14:02:14 CEST [email protected] wrote:
> I currently use kmail 1.13.7 on kde 4.8.4 (on Debian Wheezy) as my daily
> (email) driver.  I have Nepomuk (or whatever it uses shut off.)
> 
> I have something like 500k old emails in folders and probably see (or not
> see ;-) 300 to 1000 emails per day.
> 
> I'm a little afraid to move off kmail 1.13.7 for a variety of reasons, but
> among them the problems I hear related to akonadi and, presumably, the
> associated problems with handling fairly large quantities of emails.
> 
> So, my question is this -- if I'd upgrade to Buster and try to use the kmail
> version there (5.9.3), how likely am I to have problems?

I cannot answer how likely you are going to have problems because the variety 
among different Linux installations and the usage scenarios of KMail are just 
too big.

What I can say is that I (using KMail 5.10.3 on openSUSE Leap 15.1 and, on a 
different computer, using the most recent version of KMail on openSUSE 
Tumbleweed) don't have serious problems with KMail. I'm using KMail only with 
IMAP accounts. KMail has problems if I try to open one of my large local 
folders.

I strongly suggest to start with a freshly setup KMail after the upgrade to 
Buster. Trying to upgrade your old setup of KMail to the new version of KMail 
will likely cause problems.

Regards,
Ingo
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 195 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iF0EABECAB0WIQRxKgkQMhrHYtSAVAgadH5FMOC52AUCXv3nKQAKCRAadH5FMOC5
2LOlAJ4/XbG0TM/Sp1/GCGbVRkYaN8Et+gCeKdAf6fQc0xTeiUF2qeejvcn3sLg=
=A+NI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.