|Subject:||Re: Which INDY version is usable?|
|Posted by:||Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu (cp…@hower.org)|
|Date:||Wed, 7 Apr 2004|
arthur hoornweg <arthur.hoornw…@wanadoo.nl.net> wrote in
> I need the functionality of tidPOP3 and tidMessage so
> that I can load a *.eml mail file, check it for some
> spam characteristics, modify the "subject" line if I
> think there's spam in it, and save the file again.
If you are modifying only the subject line, why not just parse just the
header with Indy and leave the body unchanged?
> I had a terrible time using Indy 9.0.14 because some
> basic functionality (tidmessage.savetofile) is
> broken and causes access violations.
This was fixed in the dev snapshot.
> Moreover, the MIME decoder/encoder all by itself changes
> the MIME boundaries in the mail and corrupts some 20 %
Thats because it reencodes it - its like taking a CD, recording it to tape
(analog) and then resampling to digital. Now compare the digital versions and
nthey will of course be different.
> of the e-mail messages it processes, so that Outlook
> Express displays a blank body.
> I downloaded the CVS snapshot of Indy 9 only to find that
> the MIME processor was even worse.
A) You'll have to be specific. Users are quick to complain, but rarely bother
to give us reproducible cases.
B) Dont expect any major changes in 9 - 9 works for 99% of the cases and 10
is our current focus. So Id suggest you check against 10 and then if it fails
make a bubble for us to test against.
> So I thought I'd give Indy 10 a try, but my memory monitor
> shows it has memory leaks which makes it unusable.
Again - specifics.
Which INDY version is usable? posted by arthur hoornweg on Mon, 29 Mar 2004