qpopper - drop it ?
dj at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Nov 9 22:33:02 PST 2010
On 11/09/2010 10:06 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> Ken Moffat wrote these words on 11/09/10 14:27 CST:
>>> I'm looking at some of the less commonly used packages in BLFS (for
>>> openssl-1.0.0a), of which I think qpopper is one.
>> I have never built nor used that package. If nobody can provide a sound
>> reason to keep it, I am in favor of its demise.
> I probably put it originally in some time ago. It was the only way I
> knew at the time to pop email over an encrypted link (port 995). I have
> not used it in years as I now use gmail. If I was setting up a mail
> service today, I'd probably look at it first for pop3s capabilities.
> I did not use it with xinetd.
> I'm neutral on dropping it.
I've been using Dovecot for quite a while and am quite happy with it.
Been meaning to add it to the book but not on the priority list ATM. Not
sure how Courier-IMAP stacks up (esp for 995) but it is still pretty
popular following Postfix Users list. Dovecot is very nice in that it
also provides a SASL server implementation (single configuration for
SASL with both Postfix and Dovecot). Haven't used Cyrus SASL for server
in a long time, however, it is still needed for SASL client with Postfix
(auth smarthost for instance).
-- DJ Lucas
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.
More information about the blfs-dev