Contributed by jose on from the mail-folders-on-a-remote-box dept.
Anyone have an IMAP daemon they're happy with on OpenBSD, preferably one that supports mbox style mail boxes?
(Comments are closed)
OpenBSD Journal
Contributed by jose on from the mail-folders-on-a-remote-box dept.
Anyone have an IMAP daemon they're happy with on OpenBSD, preferably one that supports mbox style mail boxes?
(Comments are closed)
Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]
By Chris () on
-Chris
Comments
By Matthew () on
Comments
By click46 () click46@operamail.com on mailto:click46@operamail.com
By Anonymous Coward () on
That isn't the case anymore. I've been using Cyrus IMAPD on NetBSD 1.6 and it detects mmap() , its configure script chose not to use it in versions before 1.6 but like I said, that was in the past. I've also set it up on a FreeBSD 4.6 server with absolutely no complaints.
By djm () on
That being said, I have never had a problem with courier-imap - I just don't like Maildirs.
Comments
By schubert () on
By Anonymous Coward () on
Besides all the other pluses like better stability etc...
Comments
By Anonymous Coward () on
By pravus () on
of course, this adds to the complexity since it would mean the cache could desync from the message store. also, it's extra work every time a message is either added, moved, or deleted... however, if done properly, it might be quite nice.
anyone seen any work done on a system like this?
Comments
By Anonymous Coward () on
anyone seen any work done on a system like this?
Sure, check how cyrus handles its mail store for example ... or Evolution mua ... they both implement some interesting caching techniques for speed.
By Anonymous Coward () on
mbox or maildir shouldn't matter quite so much at the client side anyway though.
By Anonymous Coward () on
As anyone who's ever done any sort of programming beyond "Hello, world" knows, arrays are an absolute neccessity for many applications. Yet, rather than have a multidimensional array, this kid would rather have 25 variables that look like
value1_subvalue1
value1_subvalue2
value1_subvalue3
value1_subvalue4
value1_subvalue5
value2_subvalue1
value2_subvalue2
...and so on. This kid also "doesn't like" good chicken -- he preferres stale chicken -- and he "doesn't like" ice cream. I'm not sure if the kid is masochistic or just very, very misguided -- he's not stupid, he's a mathematical genius, but he certainly seems stupendously retarted at times.
I am not making any of this up.
I know all of this for a fact.
I would swear on my reputation, my balls, my life, the entire world, or God himself that this is true.
Bear that in mind the next time you say you "don't like" something. Because to me, maildir seems like a logical, evolutionary step -- just as logical as arrays, over a huge number of individual variables. If you have a good reason for not liking maildir, please tell me.
By RC () on
Comments
By schubert () on
Comments
By Anonymous Coward () on
Comments
By Anil Madhavapeddy () anil@recoil.org on mailto:anil@recoil.org
There's some work underway by Horde called 'imapproxy' which holds persistent IMAP connections open for webmail clients, but it's early days yet.
Comments
By James () on
I tried it out, though it doesn't seem to change anything the high load is apache not imapd
doing a top -s 1 and no idle i can see httpd processes spike and on *RARE* occasion i might see imapd jump to 1% cpu
By James () on
I tried it out, though it doesn't seem to change anything the high load is apache not imapd
doing a top -s 1 and no idle i can see httpd processes spike and on *RARE* occasion i might see imapd jump to 1% cpu
By James () on
I tried it out, though it doesn't seem to change anything the high load is apache not imapd
doing a top -s 1 and no idle i can see httpd processes spike and on *RARE* occasion i might see imapd jump to 1% cpu
By schubert () on
By RC () on
Comments
By Matthew () on
Comments
By RC () on
You lost me there. What were you trying to say and what were you saying it about?
By schubert () on
Comments
By RC () on
Thank you for clarifying, but I'm rather sure I already knew what I had asked.
> Too bad my statement was referring to pop3 versus imap.
Yep, that is too bad.
> Think before you type.
Always a good idea. Be sure to follow your own advice.
By Anonymous Coward () on
By Anonymous Coward () on
Comments
By Anonymous Coward () on
i think we all understand free and secure(sometimes not everyone), but functionality is big too...why *waste* resources do something inefficient? who cares what type of box it is? it comes down to sane implementations and using the right tool for the job. sure some application or protocol, that you *have* to use, might not be the best, but why sit there and except it? it's this relatively young community's duty to bring to light todays' issues so that they may be addressed.
don't harp on OpenBSD.
By Ben Johnson () on
We've been lucky to get 50 clinets working smoothly using MS-Exchange, 5000 clients using any of the open-source mail programs is a cinch.
By Anonymous Coward () on
By orev () on
Comments
By RC () on
What about all those providing web-based email? The mail remains on their server. Besides, pop still requires them to save the mail at least until you next check your mail... For some, that may mean minutes, for others, months.
Your answer doesn't add up.
By ViPER () viper@dmrt.net on http://www.dmrt.net
About 100 users using imap over ssl here.
courier-imap imap 127.0.0.1 acess (by ssl webmail)
courier-imap imaps mail clients outside.
(we use Maildir & postfix as MTA)
Comments
By Brian () on
By Tim () jabbo@yahoo.com on http://flaver.com/
http://howtos.eoutfitters.net/email/
Also think about using Qmail-LDAP-control and PHP-QLadmin for the Final Solution to all email concerns:
http://www.mrzesty.net/index.html?frame=http://braindump.MrZesty.net/qmail-ldap.html
I think you will be happy you did. I have been setting up a qmail-ldap-control MRA/MTA cluster, using Courier-IMAP on a couple of RAID-happy fileservers for delivery, and using Squirrelmail across our webservers to provide webmail decoupled from the MTA/MRA or MUA. That way people can use Mutt, Outlook, webmail, whatever, and not worry about a single point of failure. The architecture scales up and down nicely -- you can do it all on a single Free/OpenBSD box (qmail-ldap + openldap + courier + phpqladmin + sqwebmail) or scale it almost infinitely with the automatic QMQP clustering of the MTA/MRA machines.
The Maildir format is also easier to do atomic backups of -- I routinely sync my personal email off-site with a machine in a friend's garage, 3000 miles away, by rsync'ing my Maildir in the background from .profile. Try that with mbox...
Comments
By Anonymous Coward () on
NOFI against Postfix, i don't have hard feelings against Postfix.
By tom () tom@replic8.net on mailto:tom@replic8.net
works great on OpenBSD, I'm running it together
with Postfix on my home server. Using it I can connect via IMAP or read my mails using mutt or whatever on the 'Maildir' in my home directory,
too. SQL- and LDAP- is supported to make large
installations easy.
By Anonymous Coward () on
That is simply that it's complex and obtuse in comparison to POP3. Yes it has more features, like mailboxes and such. But hey, is this more of a functional crowd, or a featuristic one ?
grep "feature request" /usr/src/usr.bin/mg/theo.c
Comments
By RC () on
> isn't popular, I can give my main reason.
> That is simply that it's complex and obtuse in
> comparison to POP3.
Okay, but web-mail is even more complex. So for services already providing web-mail, why would IMAP be difficult to provide?
Comments
By Anonymous Coward () on
By Anonymous Coward () on
Webmail however does look different to those users, and does give them an extra value.
Only 'power-users' understand, and appreciate, the extra value IMAP offers over POP. So only companies that target these users will offer IMAP. Others just won't bother, since it doesn't get them any $$$
By Anonymous Coward () on
because it's still added complexity. why make webmail even more complex?
let's look at the difference in complexity: POPv3: rfc 1939 (23 pages) , IMAPv4r1: rfc 2060 (82 pages)
also, with regards to imap maintaining a connection, this might be more taxing since throughout a user's session some mem will be used, whereas with pop the use will come and go. so while the user is reading a long email or composing a new mail no system resources are being used.
By Anonymous Coward () on
Let the server have the redundancy (and the data), and leave the desktop to what it does best.
IMAP rocks. I will NEVER use POP again. Period.
WebMail = IMAP. Feature sets are almost identical. When designing a webmail application, it makes perfect sense to have it be a simple front-end to an IMAP server.
By Anonymous Coward () on
Comments
By matteo () on
Comments
By Buck () on
Ironically, the WU in WU-FTPD stands for Washington University which is actually in St. Louis, MO. It has its own history of security problems.
By synfin () on
By janus () janus@errornet.de on http://janus.errornet.de
I've it running since a few months and it works great. It's all based on LDAP, so the administration is really easy.
I tried cyrus, but struggeling all the time with the SASL-lib made myself go crazy, so i switched to courier.
If someone is interested in the configs, mail me :)
By ben () boudiou at reynerie.org on mailto:boudiou at reynerie.org
I would have prefered unix mbox to maildir but...
An other thing: courier provide a lot of possible authentif methodes (ldap, mysql, dbfile, passwd, ...) and allow you to have pop/imap account without corresponding /etc/passwd account, fine, no ?