On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:30:24 +1100, Donovan Baarda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Sat, Dec 08, 2001 at 11:47:54PM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote: >> Thanks for the heads up. It looks like courier is the go. > >Actualy, it seems courier-imap and courier-pop pull in a few extra support >packages including some sort of authentication daemon and it's own inet >daemon.
You don't need to use the autentication daemon if you dont plan to have high load on your system. On a decently busy system, authdaemon is a good thing to have. couriertcpd vaguely resembles inetd but can do other things. Better view it as general daemon code that would have had to be incorporated in the MTA, popd and imapd otherwise. I don't like that, but I clearly feel that courier is the least evil in the market of pop3/imap servers at the moment. >I would have abandoned courier when I discovered this, except that >courier+support packages still works out smaller than >(uw-imapd|ipopd)-ssl+support packages. I might still abandon it though if >the setup looks too complex/overkill for my application. If I had to choose between a package with an over-egoed author and a few additional daemons and packages with a more than questionable security history, I'd clearly choose the first of these two options. Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Karlsruhe, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | Fon: *49 721 966 32 15 Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fax: *49 721 966 31 29 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
