02-Apr-02 at 11:47, David Champion ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> > in which case you're not going to be doing it
> > for a whole heap of users, are you?
>
> Why not?
>
> I've been in this situation (or, more accurately, postured a similar on
> behalf of my users).
Ouch! How lucky I am to work for an ISP where I have su on pretty much all
the boxes :)
> It's trivial to extend that to handle multiple users, if you know
> their passwords. If you don't know their passwords, then it's probably
> possible to arrange a back-channel transfer not involving IMAP directly.
Yes, but if you're talking thousands of users, then you are going to give
the respective IMAP servers a big boost to their load averages ...
don't try this with Exchange IMAP support :)
Simon.
--
[Simon White. vim/mutt. [EMAIL PROTECTED] GIMPS:61.06% see www.mersenne.org]
/"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign
\ / Respect for open standards
X No HTML/RTF in email
/ \ No M$ Word docs in email
