Since SquirrelMail Looks Like It Will Never Be Supported Again...
frank2 at fjl.co.uk
Mon Sep 2 08:59:55 UTC 2013
On 02/09/2013 08:41, doug wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Aug 2013, Reko Turja wrote:
>> -----Original Message----- From: Frank Leonhardt
>>> FWIW I'm using Dovecote 1 or 2 for the IMAP. In particular, Dovecot
>>> 1 with Squirrelmail has been really hammered, but has never broken.
>>> I sometimes get time-outs copying thousands of emails in one hit,
>>> but that's fair enough and nothing has ever been lost. Could the
>>> server be the problem in your case? I found the standard imapd did
>>> weird things for a lot of clients, and making the switch after many
>>> years of trying to blame the client software was a really good
>> Running Cyrus here for ages, it might be a bit of pain to set up, but
>> it's been a really bulletproof and "zero maintenance" solution. The
>> problems cannot be replicated on any other client, only Squirrel has
>> those problems with mail not showing up.
> We run postfix/cyrus mail servers. My experience with messages not
> showing up happens with Outlook (versions 2003, 2007, and 2013),
> squirrelmail, and mac mail. In all cases reported, the user can find
> messages either by sorting by date or by searching on some matching
> criteria. We put this in our FAQ. I have not noticed this issue with a
> server using sendmail/dovecot.
That's pretty much my experience too. You start off by blaming the
client software until it shows up shows up on more than one platform. I
used to believe that imapd, part of the base system, must be
"definitive" and beyond reproach. Ha!
I don't know so much about the others, but Dovecot is full of
work-arounds for various IMAP clients to cope with bugs or variations
from the IMAP specification. You can spend forever arguing about which
interpretation of a spec is correct but I just want it to work. (Except
that Microsoft is glaringly wrong).
Dovecot is really easy to install, and migrate form the base system (I
don't know about from Cyrus), and I wish I'd been steered towards it
earlier (which is why I'm evangelising it here). Incidentally, I have no
reason to believe Dovecot 2 is any less robust than Dovecot 1 - it's
just that I've really hammered Dovecot 1 for several years longer than
the newer version.
More information about the freebsd-questions