RE: [Imap-uw] Possible buffer overflow in mailutil

2009-06-01 Thread Chris Picciotto
But Panda imap is simply not available. Therefore, UW-Imap is effectively non-existent. I was a long time fan of UW-imap, but Dovecot (with maildir backend) is probably the way go. My 2 cents. -Original Message- From: imap-uw-boun...@mailman2.u.washington.edu [mailto:imap-uw-boun...@mai

Re: [Imap-uw] Possible buffer overflow in mailutil

2009-06-01 Thread Mike Peachey
Mon 01 Jun 2009 04:49:30 GMT Mark Crispin wrote: > On Sun, 31 May 2009, Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote: >> Given this state of affairs, is there some particular piece of >> software that you would recommend we switch to? > > Panda IMAP: > http://panda.com/imap/ > > Cyrus IMAP: > http://cyrusi

Re: [Imap-uw] Possible buffer overflow in mailutil

2009-06-01 Thread Mark Crispin
On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, Mike Peachey wrote: While I don't personally advocate its use, I find it hilarious you failed to mention Courier IMAP :) Courier is quite non-compliant with the IMAP specification: http://imapwiki.org/ImapTest/ServerStatus Its author is on record as refusing to fix t

RE: [Imap-uw] Possible buffer overflow in mailutil

2009-06-01 Thread Mark Crispin
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Chris Picciotto wrote: But Panda imap is simply not available. Several sites run Panda IMAP. It is available. Therefore, UW-Imap is effectively non-existent. The one statement does not follow from the other, but that doesn't matter. UW is indeed out of the IMAP busine

Re: [Imap-uw] Possible buffer overflow in mailutil

2009-06-01 Thread David Severance
After completing a major update of our NetApp NFS mounted mbox format based mail system over a year ago to iSCSI based MIX folders (behind a perdition proxy) I have no desire to switch again from something that is working perfectly for 60K users. Panda imap was available to me when I simply ask