Maybe it is a bit paranoid to say never trust software for
which you do not have source code, but as I realized recently,
it is even more relevant to never trust software for which you
do not have the format of the data encapsulation.
After a lot of pain, I just managed to convert back to UNIX MBX
format all the folders which were stored in a gigantic PST file
(Outlook offline storage file). Outlook Express 5 finally allows
to import a folder hierarchy from Windows Messaging, which spits
out a corresponding DBX file for all folders, then a utility from
mindware in australia allows to convert the DBX files to MBX format.
This utility is not quite reliable, importing only 700 messages in a
DBX file containing over 10000, without yeilding a faillure error.
Any how, I'm back to Pine/Mutt/MBX and I never plan to go back to any
other file format unless the specifications of the file format are
published (which in the case of M$ is going to be never).
One ought to sue Microsoft for keeping their file formats proprietary.
Why put binary headers in a file when flat ASCII works so well ? Only
to artifically rais barrier to competition. I have almost 18000
(yes, 18 thousand) in a single MBX file and both PINE 4.20 and Mutt 1.0
Fran?ois D. Mnard