[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > You mean #82908? IMHO, and the author obviously agrees, mail.services is > > a simple and elegant solution -- it is your mail server that is broken. > > AFAICT, the only relevant part of the bug is editing headers with arrows. > > I guess I will try this new version once it hits the archives (in i386) and > play with mail.services if I find some documentation to/for(?) that.
Didn't upstream explain it? Just write pop3.SoftHome.Net pop to ~/.elm/mail.services. This works on PL95 as well. > It's not my mail server. ("My" isn't strictly about ownership. You can say "damn, missed my train" and it doesn't mean you own the railroad. :-) > It is (well, was, because I don't use it anymore much) > pop3.SoftHome.Net and I don't understand why should they support > IMAP or not have it blocked for me to have working Elm? That > doesn't really make sense. I didn't say they should support IMAP. The server is broken in the sense it doesn't return "Connection refused." > Server should be able to respond to pop3 and nothing else and, in my > quite humble opinion, Elm should still work and be able to connect > to its POP3 service (port). But it does! You just need to specify POP3 since guessing it is not possible in this case. [...] > Thanks for your time and devotion to Debian! I was afraid there would be no > updates to Elm in Debian. I may get together one day and find some package > to take care of (like elm-me+) instead of just filing bugs and annoy > developers with them. Looking forward to it. :-) Thanks, Matej