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-----