Difference between revisions of "Talk:OfflineIMAP"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Updated section on starting as a systemd timer: Clarify in last edit.)
(Updated section on starting as a systemd timer: Remove section: references what's not there anymore.)
Line 15: Line 15:
[[User:Jasonwryan|Jasonwryan]] ([[User talk:Jasonwryan|talk]]) 03:14, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
[[User:Jasonwryan|Jasonwryan]] ([[User talk:Jasonwryan|talk]]) 03:14, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
== Updated section on starting as a systemd timer ==
The section is still called "systemd service", not "systemd timer", but I'm reluctant to dig in and find out how to change this without introducing link-rot.
Also, the procedure as described there "works for me", and is described on [http://www.offlineimap.org/doc/contrib/systemd.html offlineimap's own contrib doc], but it'd be nice to get confirmation.
There was a warning on "possible database inconsistency" when the service is terminated by systemd on timeout, but I haven't checked which signal is used to do that. The warning may be bogus - see [[#Warnings]] topic above.
-- [[User:Veox|Veox]] ([[User talk:Veox|talk]]) 11:43, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:56, 30 October 2017

http://nicolas33.github.com/offlineimap/#signals says

 You can send SIGINT to OfflineIMAP using (~/.offlineimap/pid) to kill it. SIGUSR1 will force an immediate resync of all accounts. This will be ignored for all accounts for which a resync is already in progress.

Can someone please explain how to send a signal to a file?

In that file is stored PID (process ID) of the current running offlineimap process. You can use this number as an argument to kill command, to send signals. Like this:
kill -s SIGUSR1 `cat ~/.offlineimap/pid`
You can see more details here, Nixie 13:50, 7 February 2011 (EST)


Before (re)adding more warnings about offlineimaps alleged lack of stability and the potential to cataclysmically delete all your mail, please provide some examples of where this has actually happenend. I have been using it exclusively for the last 3 years on at least 3 machines and have experienced no issues. I can't find a single forum thread describing any such massive failures and the repeated attempts to include warnings on this page is starting to look like scaremongering.

Jasonwryan (talk) 03:14, 6 March 2013 (UTC)