[aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
On Sat, Oct 20, 2001 at 08:25:35PM -0500, Carl D Cravens wrote:
>
> On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Jonathan Hall wrote:
>
> > For my particular application (and I realize this is not the same as
> > everyone else's), that's not a concern, b/c nobody will have shells on my
> > mail server machine.
>
> Do keep in mind that without proper precautions, CGI scripts could write
> to that directory if your users can do CGI.
The only services I'll be running on the machine are SMTP, POP3, IMAP, SSH,
and possibly DNS.
> > Since when does an MTA handle mailing lists anyway? I'd much rather use
> > majordomo or listar or some other 3rd party mailing list package than my
> > MTA... regardless of what MTA I use. And even if my MTA does support that,
> > I wouldn't use it, I'd still use some other app.
>
> Well, if it's user-managed distribution lists, I think that function
> should be left to the user's mail client. If it's a true mailing list
> server, it seems to me like I *wouldn't* want any Tom, Dick or Harry on my
> system setting up mailing lists without going through me. I want control
> over my resource usage and mailing lists can use a lot of resources.
Good point. I still think the mailing list manager should be an application
separate from the MTA, although it will of course need cooperation from the
MTA in most cases.
> > powerful" mean "power hungry"? In reading some things by qmail's author,
> > I'm beginning to think so... I think he wants to "take over" all mail
> > aspects with a single program. I'm not sure that's wise.
>
> That's not the traditional Unix paradigm of breaking tasks down into small
> parts. Granted, your MTA and POP/IMAP servers have to agree on how to
> store/access mail boxes, but they can do that through well-written
> standards instead of making one program do it all.
Exactly.
> > My only comment here is... Jump out of the 1980s and stop using pine. :P
>
> I read my mail through a telnet connection (through a proxy) a lot of the
I read my mail via telnet 100% of the time. I don't even have an MUA
installed on ANY of my workstations. But that's by choice, not by 'force'
of a proxy or other limitations. I still hate Pine's incredibly poor use of
my system resources and its inabilities. Mutt is my MUA of choice for those
reasons.
> I also have a personal "requirement" of being able to read mail and news
Mutt does that, too. :-)
> through the same interface. They're essentially the same function (they
> just get messages from different sources), and I think that I should be
> able to read both through essentially the same interface. Pine's news
> reader is somewhat primative, but I've got a couple external scripts that
Pine's * is grossly primiative, IMHO :-)
> help me manage my filters and the like. Pine also meets several other
> critera... can use an external editor, can get sig files from a script,
> can customize sig sources and lots of other things on a
> per-folder/newsgroup basis.
Mutt does all that... originally I switched to mutt b/c I couldn't get pine
to use the external editor I wanted. Perhaps I just didn't look hard
enough, or perhaps that feature has been since added. But after using mutt
for just a few weeks, I came to the conclusion that I should have switched
long before. (I can thank Steve Saner for suggesting mutt to me at that
time :-)
> Pine is not ideal... it lacks a lot of "nice to have" features. But it
> has all of my "got to have" features that no other mail/news client does.
"no other?" Every feature you've mentioned I *know* is in mutt. I suspect
it's also in gnus... and I'm sure there are other text-based mail/news
readers that I'm not aware of that meet those criteria, too.
Mutt also has a number of features I don't (yet) use... such as easy
PGP/GnuPG integration, many types of filters, and completely configurable
keymappings.
Oh well... in the end, it's all a matter of personal preference.... But as
we all know... "MY preference is always the RIGHT preference..." :-)
--
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Jonathan Hall * jonhall@xxxxxxxxxxxx * PGP public key available
Systems Admin, Future Internet Services; Goessel, KS * (620) 367-2487
http://www.futureks.net/ * PGP Key ID: FE 00 FD 51
-= Running Debian GNU/Linux =-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-- This is the discussion@xxxxxxxxx list. To unsubscribe,
visit http://tmp2.complete.org/cgi-bin/listargate-aclug.cgi
[aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server, Carl D Cravens, 2001/10/19
- [aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server, Ryan Hunt, 2001/10/19
- [aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server, Carl D Cravens, 2001/10/20
- [aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server, Jonathan Hall, 2001/10/20
- [aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server, Carl D Cravens, 2001/10/20
- [aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server,
Jonathan Hall <=
- [aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server, Carl D Cravens, 2001/10/21
- [aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server, Carl D Cravens, 2001/10/21
- [aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server, Jonathan Hall, 2001/10/21
- [aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server, Carl D Cravens, 2001/10/21
[aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server, lowell, 2001/10/21
[aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server, Steven Saner, 2001/10/21
[aclug-L] Re: MUAs (was Virtual POP3 and IMAP server), Jonathan Hall, 2001/10/20
[aclug-L] Re: MUAs (was Virtual POP3 and IMAP server), Carl D Cravens, 2001/10/21
[aclug-L] Re: MUAs (was Virtual POP3 and IMAP server), Jonathan Hall, 2001/10/21
|
|