On Sat, Dec 08, 2001 at 11:09:22AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: > On Fri, 07 Dec 2001 11:04:01 +1100 (EST), Donovan Baarda > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >As a matter of interest, what is the story with all the imap and pop > >implementations? The debian woody "mailserver" task includes qpopper and uw- > >imapd. What's wrong with the much smaller ipopd, which is uw-imapd's pop > >counterpart? > > This is flame war material.
I had no idea that it would be a touchy subject... my enquiry was purely innocent. I'm just in the process of setting up the mailserver part of a new woody box and was a little overwhelmed when I realised all the options. When in doubt, I usually pick the smallest download. This is mainly because I live on the end of a slow link, but also because I'm a KISS, anti-bloat kinda guy. qpopper is about six times the size of the other popd's, how much extra can a popd have? > Generally, I keep my hands off any UW software because the UW people > are not very security aware. > > >What are peoples experiences/comments? Are the ssl variants worth using? > > I like Courier because it is one very flexible package and it does all > variants that might be needed: pop/imap in both ssl and non-ssl. There > is even an MTA which I have never looked at, though. Thanks for the heads up. It looks like courier is the go. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ABO: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info, including pgp key ----------------------------------------------------------------------
