Re: PINE problem

On 03/02/2010, Matt Ackeret <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Bret Busby wrote:
>>On 03/02/2010, Matt Ackeret <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Bret Busby wrote:
>>>>To install and use alpine, to replace pine, the only way that I can
>>>>see of doing it, is buying a new computer, and building a new system,
>>>>with alpine instead of pine, then copying all of the mail folders and
>>>>the .pinerc file, to the new system, in addition to my web browsers'
>>>>data (bookmarks, etc), and, it would be such a waste, if the same
>>>>problem persists within alpine.
>>>
>>> This makes no sense.  Why can't you compile, or get someone else to
>>> compile,
>>> alpine to run on your existing computer?
>>>
>>
>>The way that I have described, ensures that what I have at present, is
>>not lost as with previous data, as I have described.
>>
>>It is parallel implementation, which is the only way to protect
>>existing data and the existing system.
>>
>>>From looking at the Debian package repository search facility, alpine
>>exists for Debian 5.0, that I am currently using, but, if I simply
>>install it over the pine that I am currently using, and things go
>>wrong, I stand to lose alot.
>
> So (1) back up your data, (2) install alpine, and if it for some
> reason doesn't work for you, use your backups.

The thing is that, at present,
1. I have reasonable confidence that, apart from not flushing the
messages from the INBOX as they are filtered, and thence downlloading
multiple copies of messages, pine seems to be kind of working, and
2. I have an idea that the files that I need to backup, are the whole
of the mail directory (through all of its subdirectories, however many
gigabytes I previously specified, which would not fit on a single
DVD), and the .pinerc file, but I am not sure whether those are the
only files (and directory hierarchies) that I would need to backup,
and
3. It was during a previous backup procedure, for a Debian system
upgrade (Iam not sure, but it may have been from 3.1 to 4), that I
lost 20 years of research.

Thus, the parallel implementation method, appears to be the only
(relatively) safe option.

Oh, a further note - It occurred to me last night, that this problem
occurred on the first day of this month, being the day that the
archiving of folders that are to be archived, occurs. I believe that
the folders that are supposed to be archived, were archived, but, I
cannot be sure that that process completed successfully.

I assume that pine does not generate a log file of transactions,
and/or a log file of error messages, like fetchmail does.

-- 

Bret Busby
................
_______________________________________________
Pine-info mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/pine-info