* On 2007.05.11, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, * "Charles Cazabon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In my experience, most people find configuring and using getmail easier. I
I actually found fetchmail much easier to configure than getmail, but that's partly because I began using fetchmail many years ago, when it was easier to configure than it is now. And in fact, it's not as much that getmail was hard to configure as that it was hard to figure out how to configure it. Once I knew the rules, it was pretty easy to do correctly. > think fetchmail's abominable security record will likely improve under > its new maintainers (they actually have some technical credentials), > but they're still saddled with the design decisions and some code from > its ... ahem ... wild years. I know this makes me a bad person, but I haven't been much bothered by fetchmail's security. However, I've found it mind-bogglingly buggy over the years in more mundane ways. Every now & then it just stops downloading my mail -- dumps core and leaves messages piled up on the server, such that I can only dig myself out with another tool. And I only know it's happening when I stop getting mail from certain sources/to certain destinations. I've upgraded to fix this many times, but it's always happened again after a few more months. It's been very frustrating. A POP downloader is one of the rare terminal-mode programs that I really don't care to know anything about or to look at the code for. I'll never care about new features, and I'm happiest if I never have to update it. I just want it to do its job quietly, quickly, and without engaging me. On these points, getmail has been a success in the several months I've been using it. Also, if I do need to dig in, python is tasty. Although there are C programs whose code I like very much, fetchmail's is not among them. -- -D. [EMAIL PROTECTED], an Element of NSIT University of Chicago
