On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 12:12:43AM -0400, Brian Nelson wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Baarda) writes: > > > Though I use uw-imapd instead of Courier. The general consensus is Courier > > is better, but I went with uw-imapd because it was "lighter", and I had > > legacy non-Maildir mailboxes. > > > > Courier is nearly 1MB installed including ssl and support packages, compared > > to 350K for uw-imapd-ssl. Courier uses a seperate authdaemon and > > serverdaemon, whereas uw-imapd uses the normal inetd. Courier looked like > > overkill for my system. > > But how big are UW's c-client library files? I'm pretty sure that, > including the protocol libraries, uw-imap ends up being larger than > courier.
I was using the installed sizes as reported for the packages. In the case of uw-imapd, there were no dependancies that were not already installed on my system so I did not include them; libc-client-ssl2001, libc6, libpam0g, libssl0.9.6, openssl. For courier-imap-ssl, there were several packages that I would have to install just for courier support so these were included; courier-imap, courier-ssl, courier-base, courier-authdaemon. If you follow all the dependancies, courier-imap-ssl includes all the dependancies of uw-imapd except libc-client-ssl2001, which is 913kB... Hmm, looks like you are right... the only things on my system using libc-client-ssl2001 is uw-imapd-ssl and ipopd-ssl. If you look at a combined courier-pop-ssl+courier-imap-ssl vs ipopd-ssl+uw-imapd-ssl, they come out pretty much the same, with courier perhaps being slightly in front. However, I still feel a little uneasy about running a seperate authdaemon and serverdaemon just for pop/imap. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ABO: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info, including pgp key ----------------------------------------------------------------------