On Thu, 25 Jan 2007, Per Foreby wrote:
Just thought I'd comment myself to make things more clear: Yes I have read imaprc.txt thoroughly, and fully understand all the warnings. I totally agree that a global configuration file for all c-client applications generally is a bad idea. However, on a stand-alone imap server with only one application the file provides a convenient alternative.
The problem that I have found is that some third-party distributions tend to write that file, often without telling the user doing the installation. Often, what was written by the distribution was ill-advised, and magically breaks things that the site depended upon (disabling drivers, setting a mailsubdir prefix when the site didn't use one or used a different one, disabling locking(!), etc.).
It's easy enough to tell the site "delete that file". But that doesn't work if they had a dependency on something in an older version of that file that they wrote. Then they get broken in a different way.
So what I really meant to ask is if there is any distinction between the options mentioned in imaprc.txt and those not. Are the undocumented options necessarily more experimental, or is it just that the documentation covers the most usful options?
More likely that imaprc.txt covers what existed when the document was written, and hasn't been updated. Man of the settings are useless, and some have no purpose other than for me to create a malfunctioning imapd to test error-handling in Pine!
-- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. _______________________________________________ Imap-uw mailing list Imap-uw@u.washington.edu https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
