This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: proposal: imap, imap-server, and imap-util
- From: Igor Pechtchanski <pechtcha at cs dot nyu dot edu>
- To: Abraham Backus <abraham at backus dot com>
- Cc: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 15:43:20 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: proposal: imap, imap-server, and imap-util
- Reply-to: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Abraham Backus wrote:
> I haven't checked that, but I did notice that there's a SSLTYPE=unix option
> to pass to make that allows plaintext for both ssl and non-ssl. Of course,
> there's still the prompt during make that this is a non-standard option
> according to IESG. If I build it with this option, one can always decide to
> not put an "imap" entry in /etc/inetd.conf and just have an "imaps" entry.
> Which sounds better to you guys?
> a) the default (only allow plaintext passwords via ssl)
> b) build allowing plaintext passwords regardless of whether ssl is used
> c) build two sets of binaries
(c) sounds good, but wouldn't it logically evolve into two sets of
> One more thing before I go make another package....
> are the imapd, ipop3d, and ipop2d names ok, or should they be prefixed with
The trend seems to be "uw-imapd" and create a symbolic link to "imapd" in
a postinstall script (if nonexistent).
> ----- Original Message -----
> > Isn't that what RedHat does eg., ipop3d (non-ssl) and ipop3ds
> > (ssl)... Either way I think it's a good idea.
Just a quick note: the "s" probably goes before the "d" ("d" stands for
|\ _,,,---,,_ email@example.com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ firstname.lastname@example.org
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty.
-- Leto II