nnimap/Gcc - process imap not running

nnimap/Gcc - process imap not running

[David Abrahams]

Hi,


I have

   (setq gnus-message-archive-group '("nnimap+www.stlport.com:INBOX"))

so that I can follow threads I participate in with `^' and `A T' in
the summary buffer (not that it's working all that well -- `^' often
fails to find the previous message in the thread and sometimes `A T'
even fails until I do `/ o' and mark the article unread)**. In any
case, often when I send new mail it will go out via SMTP just fine,
but then occasionally gnus beeps and reports 'process imap not
running', usually after my computer has gone to sleep for a while, but
not always.  I've encountered various other scenarios where this
happens and it takes quitting GNUs or various similar measures for it
to get its marbles back.  Is there any way to insert a "start imap
and retry" sequence in the entry point to commands which need to use
the process?

Thanks,
Dave

**Now, maybe this isn't the best method; I should probably cc: myself
instead... but it should work, right?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

unreachable IMAP server (was: nnimap/Gcc - process imap not running)

[David Abrahams]

More problems with IMAP process seem to occur when GNUs asks if I want
to "go offline" because my server is unreachable.  If I say "no", I
get wedged in my IMAP group's summary buffer such that it seems
impossible to reconnect.  I also can't quit the group because
apparently it wants to update flags on the server. "Yes" seems to be
a safe answer, but why give people a choice if they're just going to
get wedged?

David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
>
> I have
>
>    (setq gnus-message-archive-group '("nnimap+www.stlport.com:INBOX"))
>
> so that I can follow threads I participate in with `^' and `A T' in
> the summary buffer (not that it's working all that well -- `^' often
> fails to find the previous message in the thread and sometimes `A T'
> even fails until I do `/ o' and mark the article unread)**. In any
> case, often when I send new mail it will go out via SMTP just fine,
> but then occasionally gnus beeps and reports 'process imap not
> running', usually after my computer has gone to sleep for a while, but
> not always.  I've encountered various other scenarios where this
> happens and it takes quitting GNUs or various similar measures for it
> to get its marbles back.  Is there any way to insert a "start imap
> and retry" sequence in the entry point to commands which need to use
> the process?
>
> Thanks,
> Dave
>
> **Now, maybe this isn't the best method; I should probably cc: myself
> instead... but it should work, right?
>
> -- 
> Dave Abrahams
> Boost Consulting
> www.boost-consulting.com
>
>
>

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

Re: unreachable IMAP server

[Kai Großjohann]

David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:

> More problems with IMAP process seem to occur when GNUs asks if I
> want to "go offline" because my server is unreachable.  If I say
> "no", I get wedged in my IMAP group's summary buffer such that it
> seems impossible to reconnect.  I also can't quit the group because
> apparently it wants to update flags on the server. "Yes" seems to be
> a safe answer, but why give people a choice if they're just going to
> get wedged?

Gnus doesn't know it'll become wedged...

Usually, when the server is unreachable, and you know it's temporary
(maybe your ethernet cable was unplugged), then saying no is the
right answer: Gnus will retry next time.

-- 
A preposition is not a good thing to end a sentence with.

Re: unreachable IMAP server

[David Abrahams]

kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de (Kai Großjohann) writes:

> David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
>
>> More problems with IMAP process seem to occur when GNUs asks if I
>> want to "go offline" because my server is unreachable.  If I say
>> "no", I get wedged in my IMAP group's summary buffer such that it
>> seems impossible to reconnect.  I also can't quit the group because
>> apparently it wants to update flags on the server. "Yes" seems to be
>> a safe answer, but why give people a choice if they're just going to
>> get wedged?
>
> Gnus doesn't know it'll become wedged...

Of course I realize that ;-).  It was a rhetorical question.

> Usually, when the server is unreachable, and you know it's temporary
> (maybe your ethernet cable was unplugged), then saying no is the
> right answer: Gnus will retry next time.

Actually it doesn't.  That's exactly my scenario.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

Re: unreachable IMAP server

[Kai Großjohann]

David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:

> kai.grossjohann@uni-duisburg.de (Kai Großjohann) writes:
>
>> Usually, when the server is unreachable, and you know it's temporary
>> (maybe your ethernet cable was unplugged), then saying no is the
>> right answer: Gnus will retry next time.
>
> Actually it doesn't.  That's exactly my scenario.

But you're inside a group.  Hm.  Maybe that is a situation where Gnus
doesn't expect to have to retry.  In the Group buffer, it does retry
correctly (at least it did for me).

-- 
A preposition is not a good thing to end a sentence with.