Re: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt

2002-01-19 Thread Adrian Phillips
> "Kent" == Kent Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Kent> On 1/18/2002 5:56 PM, Kent Perrier wrote: >> To the best of my ability, I have. It looks to me that the MUA >> has to call ssmtp to send an email. It cannot run as a daemon, >> on port 25, to accept connections from

Re: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt

2002-01-18 Thread Kent Perrier
On 1/18/2002 6:54 PM, Jeff Hu wrote: > Kent, > > Read /usr/doc/Cygwin/ssmtp-2.38.7.README. It explains you how you can > coerce mutt into using it for sending mail. Then read > /usr/doc/ssmtp-2.38.7/README about the limitations of ssmtp. Ok. This helps a little. Unfortunately, I would like a

RE: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt

2002-01-18 Thread Jeff Hu
Perrier Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 7:18 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt On 1/18/2002 5:56 PM, Kent Perrier wrote: > To the best of my ability, I have. It looks to me that the MUA has to > call ssmtp to send an email. It cannot

Re: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt

2002-01-18 Thread Kent Perrier
On 1/18/2002 5:56 PM, Kent Perrier wrote: > To the best of my ability, I have. It looks to me that the MUA has to > call ssmtp to send an email. It cannot run as a daemon, on port 25, to > accept connections from MUAs. The man page says the -bd option is > unsupported and my experience from

Re: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt

2002-01-18 Thread Kent Perrier
On 1/18/2002 5:46 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 05:26:39PM -0600, Kent Perrier wrote: > >>On 1/18/2002 3:19 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >>>On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 02:56:43PM -0600, Kent Perrier wrote: >>> From my reading of the man page it appears that ssmtp does n

Re: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt

2002-01-18 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 05:26:39PM -0600, Kent Perrier wrote: > On 1/18/2002 3:19 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 02:56:43PM -0600, Kent Perrier wrote: > > >>From my reading of the man page it appears that ssmtp does not run as a > >>daemon, it needs to be called by MUA to

Re: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt

2002-01-18 Thread Kent Perrier
On 1/18/2002 3:19 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 02:56:43PM -0600, Kent Perrier wrote: >>From my reading of the man page it appears that ssmtp does not run as a >>daemon, it needs to be called by MUA to send that mail. Is this correct? >> > > Ever tried `man ssmtp'? Wh

Re: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt

2002-01-18 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 02:56:43PM -0600, Kent Perrier wrote: > I have been playing with ssmtp, trying to set it up as my local mail > relay. I would like to have it run as a daemon. Is there a way to do that? > > I tried postfix, but it doesn't compile out of the box (it doesn't know > what

Re: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt

2002-01-18 Thread Kent Perrier
I have been playing with ssmtp, trying to set it up as my local mail relay. I would like to have it run as a daemon. Is there a way to do that? I tried postfix, but it doesn't compile out of the box (it doesn't know what OS "CYGWIN_NT-5.0 1.3.6(0.47/3/2)" is) and it this is more of a "lets s

Re: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt

2002-01-18 Thread Jason Tishler
Pat, Please keep your replies on the list. On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 10:39:31AM -0800, Patrick Lightbody wrote: > Jason, actually I got the procmail binary, and I compiled mutt and > fetchmail myself. I was mostly having trouble getting procmail to work on > port 25, Most likely because you don

Re: Windows XP, inetd, and procmail, fetchmail, and mutt

2002-01-18 Thread Jason Tishler
Pat, On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 01:08:00AM -0800, Patrick Lightbody wrote: > So... any thoughts? I need good POP support, good filtering support, and a > good mailer (aka: I need fetchmail, procmail, and mutt). Has anyone else > done this? Yes, I use this exact combination. > I've exhausted my s