Do you compact from the file menu so allocated space is freed and deleted messages actually purged from their original folders. If not you probably still have 5 years worth of mail in your folders marked as deleted and hidden from view.

Why compact an empty folder?

This is why. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/compacting-folders

wisemagic said

Why compact an empty folder?

I thought I was fairly direct in why. Matt said

Do you compact from the file menu so allocated space is freed and deleted messages actually purged from their original folders.

Put simply empty is not empty.

"Put simply empty is not empty."

When I delete something, and I empty that folder, I expect it to be gone. Hence the "DELETE" operation.

I'll mark this as Solved.

Removing Thunderbird and using Evolution

Thanks for the insight.

wisemagic said

"Put simply empty is not empty." When I delete something, and I empty that folder, I expect it to be gone. Hence the "DELETE" operation. I'll mark this as Solved. Removing Thunderbird and using Evolution Thanks for the insight.

You sure evolution does not do the same thing. Microsoft outlook does.

Given evolution uses the same mbox file format Thunderbird does it will need to either run like molasses on a cold morning or do some sort of tricks like mark mail as deleted to maintain it's usability. Just as Thunderbird does.

Expectations without facts and reality rarely coincide. Especially in computing. Enjoy your evolution experience.

Won't know until I use it for a few years. But I did just regain 8 gigs hard drive space.

Thanks

Automatic compact only started working again recently. So if you were not manually compacting folders as mentioned by others, then you've been accomulating disk space.

What precise version Thunderbird were you running?

Why compact trash? Why compact, with no way to uncompact? Why store compacted emails, that are worthless to us?

I had begun importing from Thunderbird to Evolution, (one of a couple email clients I'm trying out).

I had about 20 emails in my man account. During the import, it brought along 85,536 deleted emails, with their attachments dating back to 2013.

The reason I deleted this stuff is simply because it's of no value. I don't understand the Thunderbird developers reasoning for keeping garbage. Delete should be renamed to "Make Invisible".

Importing Contacts was also enlightening. I have about 25 family and friends that I mainly converse with. I don't know why Thunderbird feels the need to collect email addresses. The collected addresses, mainly all spammers, was close to 150,000. All useless.

Take a step back...

Compact and emptying are NOT the same thing. Different concepts, different functions. They serve different purposes in the mbox world (Berkley mailbox). Don't even try to compare or equate the two. (If you want to be even more confused through Expunge into the mix. But again, different concept, different function.)

Furthermore, compact is a one way action. There is no uncompact and there is no reason to want one.

These concepts are not unique to Thunderbird.

My point exactly. Why compact and save, when it's not wanted to begin with? Why compact garbage instead of removing it?

Emptying doesn't empty. It makes them invisible.

I've gone from an 8 gigabyte Thunderbird, to a 150 Megabyte Evolution, simply by exposing the not-deleted garbage, and expunging it.

There you go Wayne. See how clear the Compact function name is? I gave the link to the article. Matt and you have explained it several times and the OP still does not get it. Poorly named function!

Wisemagic, despite the poor choice of names for this function is has nothing to do with compressing, squeezing down, squashing or other wise making files smaller like you think when you hear someone say Zip up files.

This is where the moderator is going to come in an say "but it does make the leftover file smaller." Okay. The overall result is a smaller left over file but it did not compress or zip up anything like the name makes people think.

Pure and simple it just permanently deletes messages that you have clicked on to delete previously. Thunderbird just marks those files for deletion and only really removes them and frees up the disk space when you Compact the folder. This poorly names function is a source of confusion on a weekly basis on this forum so you are in good company.

Think about it as you throw the left over chicken in the trash can under the kitchen sink. It is still taking up room in your house until trash day when you take it to the curb for the trash truck to pickup. It also gives you that one last chance to put it out of the trash when you discover you have nothing left for that late night snack. Not to be confused with the aptly named trash compactor where you put those left overs in the compactor and compact them smaller before taking them to the curb.

I don't think the reporter misunderstands now. And the soup analogy is a good one.

Regardless of whether it's a good name or not, the term compact has been around for decades, and so it's etched in stone. Hopefully in the coming months the function will be hidden so we won't need to worry about users misunderstanding it anymore.

"Pure and simple it just permanently deletes messages that you have clicked on to delete previously."

I'm not buying that. Thunderbird has nagged about compacting over the years and it was done, and space used continued to increase,....and when importing to Evolution I had 85,536 deleted emails, with their attachments dating back to 2013.

We can all let this go. I have moved on to Evolution. There really isn't much more I can say about this experience.

> Thunderbird has nagged about compacting over the years and it was done, and space used continued to increase

That's what most people call, a "bug". That's why people like us ask probing questions, so it can be determined whether there really is a bug and then be fixed in the code instead of being glossed over.