Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Which graphical email client for Linux?

By Mendax Veritas in Technology
Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 09:19:31 PM EST
Tags: Help! (Ask Kuro5hin) (all tags)
Help! (Ask Kuro5hin)

I'm trying to free myself of Outlook Express by switching to a viable, similarly-featured MUA for Linux. This is what I've found out and experienced to date in the course of this quest. Any helpful advice will be appreciated.


I've been annoyed for some time with Outlook Express. It stores messages in a proprietary binary file format that nothing else can read (there are some tools on Freshmeat, but none of them claim to work with OE 5.0 or later, so I'll be transferring my mail archives via an IMAP server), its mail filtering is dumbed-down and overly simplistic, and it has some very annoying habits when it comes to displaying non-HTML messages (for example, it routinely ignores leading whitespace on a line, so code samples, particularly Python, are unreadable; also, it likes to insert "file:" in front of anything that it thinks is a file URL, including C++ comments beginning with //). I also just want to do as much of my work as possible on Linux, even though I make my living writing software for the Windows platform, because I'm tired of Windows crashing and I want my mail on a machine that's turned on 24-7.

So the next question is, which Linux MUA should I use? Well, I like GUIs, and I need access to multiple independent email accounts. These requirements rule out a few clients, such as Pine and Mutt, which aren't graphical, and Balsa, which seems to support only one account per user. I have GNOME, but not KDE, which probably rules out a few more options. My new mail client doesn't have to be GNOME-based, although use of GTK would be nice, as it's my favorite X toolkit.

Since I browse using Mozilla 0.8.whatever (build 2001032212), the obvious first thought was to use that for email too. Wrong! It looked okay at first, but having set it up with all my mail accounts and downloaded my 25 MB of archives from the IMAP server, I now find it no longer works. Attempting to start the Mozilla mail client results in Mozilla apparently trying to consume all available memory and CPU cycles, without any mail client window ever appearing. (I killed the process once it had consumed a combined 150 MB of RSS and swap space -- this on a machine with 128 MB of physical RAM). Now, this is obviously just a bug, but right now, Mozilla is utterly useless for me as an email client.

Another obvious thought was Emacs, since I use it for other purposes already. But although it has an X interface, it isn't really graphical, and since it's single-threaded (at least the FSF version is -- I'm not sure about XEmacs), this effectively means your text editor will pause every time your Emacs mailer decides to poll for new mail. Usually, this won't take long, but it can if there's a problem connecting, or if the server is slow. And I'd rather not have to run two copies of Emacs.

So now I'm looking for other candidates. A quick survey of Debian's package list and www.gnome.org reveals a few interesting possibilities:

Evolution is Ximian's forthcoming Outlook killer, integrating email, contact management, and personal scheduling. The feature list looks superb, but it's still in a relatively early stage of development, so I'm not sure I care to trust it yet. Does anyone use this for their primary MUA? Is it ready for such use? (Their own web page says it's not, but that could be considered just a legal disclaimer.)

Mahogany is GTK-based and has a built-in Python interpreter, which is a definite plus. Its web site doesn't say exactly what you can do with the Python scripting, but I would guess that mail filters can be written in Python, which would be a vast improvement over Outlook Express's simple filtering. As for multiple accounts, well, I'm not quite sure. The web site says Mahogany supports "multiple incoming mail folders", which might mean multiple accounts.

Cronos II is another GNOME mailer. It supports multiple accounts, but does not have IMAP support yet. (I can live without that, actually.)

MMC is also a GNOME mailer. It supports POP3 and IMAP. Multiple account support is planned, but not yet implemented.

Pygmy is another GNOME MUA. One of the first things I found out about it is that it's written in Python, which leads me to suspect that it will be slow as hell. Additionally, it has no POP3 or IMAP support; you have to use fetchmail or some similar program to get your messages from the server and put them in your mailbox.

I would be very interested to hear about anyone else's experience with any of these mailers, or about any other mailers that anyone uses regularly.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
If you read your mail on Linux, *BSD, or another Unix-based OS, what mail client do you use?
o Balsa 4%
o Evolution 4%
o Another GNOME MUA 3%
o A KDE MUA 9%
o Netscape/Mozilla Mail 7%
o Another X MUA 6%
o A non-graphical MUA 58%
o Email? What's that? 5%

Votes: 111
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Freshmeat
o Mozilla
o Evolution
o Mahogany
o Cronos II
o MMC
o Pygmy
o Also by Mendax Veritas


Display: Sort:
Which graphical email client for Linux? | 74 comments (74 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)
More than one Mozilla bug (3.50 / 4) (#1)
by DesiredUsername on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 02:05:35 PM EST

FYI, even if Mozilla wasn't crashing on you, you'd still have at least two problems:

1) Auto-download messages, doesn't--at least not for me. I'm using 0.8.1.
2) IMAP DELETE doesn't do anything. It doesn't even send a DELETE command to the server.

Play 囲碁
Another option (4.66 / 3) (#2)
by DesiredUsername on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 02:08:25 PM EST

Use fetchmail to get your POP and IMAP messages and do the filtering. Then you just need to find a reader you like that can read a standard mail store.

Play 囲碁
unix mail (4.13 / 15) (#3)
by eLuddite on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 02:15:11 PM EST

This is what I love about unix. I run the following best of breeds

(1) sendmail for transport
(2) fetchmail for retrieval
(3) procmail for filtering and archiving
(4) mutt for threading

giving me unlimited power and flexibility over the the 3 people I've given my email address to.

f34r me.

---
God hates human rights.

Best of Breeds? (4.00 / 1) (#41)
by tzanger on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 01:37:54 PM EST

Sendmail?

I'm sorry, I may be starting a flame war here but how can you consider sendmail a best of breed class of software? We're talking about the security-exploit-du-jour sendmail, right? One huge must-run-as-root sendmail, right?

My personal preference is qmail as it doesn't require you to learn how to read backwards and in a hieroglyphic language in order to configure it, yet provides as much if not more power than the age-old sendmail. And it's somewhat more modular and doesn't run entirely as root.

I don't agree with DJ Berinstein's coding style, nor am I particularly fond of his licensing style, but his software just f'ing works. It works fast, securely and just plain old well, which would be the requirements for my "Best of breed" title.



[ Parent ]
Sendmail and qmail (long, sorry) (4.00 / 1) (#48)
by sigwinch on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 05:27:21 PM EST

Come on, modern Sendmail isn't *that* bad.

We're talking about the security-exploit-du-jour sendmail, right?
A quick check at www.securityfocus.com turns up no remote root vulnerabilities for Sendmail in the past couple of years, and I don't remember hearing about any recently on BugTraq. I'm not saying Sendmail is secure, but it *is* possible for things to improve from the late-80s level, you know.

qmail as it doesn't require you to learn how to read backwards and in a hieroglyphic language in order to configure it
Modern Sendmail uses the M4 macro processor for configuration. Allman himself says that anybody writing sendmail.cf by hand is crazy. Here's a snippet from my sendmail.mc, showing Sendmail doesn't deserve such a bad reputation:
undefine(`UUCP_RELAY')
undefine(`BITNET_RELAY')
define(`confAUTO_REBUILD')
define(`confTO_CONNECT', `1m')
define(`confTRY_NULL_MX_LIST',true)
define(`confDONT_PROBE_INTERFACES',true)
MAILER(procmail)
MAILER(smtp)
FEATURE(`access_db')
FEATURE(`blacklist_recipients')

I don't agree with DJ Berinstein's coding style,

Just downloaded the qmail-1.03 tarball. The code is atrocious, and I mean 'Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure' type atrocious. Here's an example from token822.c:
 for (i = 0;i < ta->len;++i)
  {
   t = ta->t + i;
   switch(t->type)
    {
     case TOKEN822_COMMA: *s++ = ','; break;
     case TOKEN822_AT: *s++ = '@'; break;

No, I didn't munge the formatting: it really is one space per indent level. The style elsewhere is appallingly unreadable too: he crams as much stuff as possible on single lines. Then there's the commenting problem: out of a total of 15542 lines of .c files, there are only 255 comments, of which 251 are one-liners and 205 are end-of-line comments (e.g., "i += 1 /* increment i */). In other words, qmail is totally unreadable and totally undocumented. I don't care how much of a net.security.genius Bernstein is, this is the canonical recipe for insecurity. Everybody makes mistakes, which are usually fixed by other people working on tight schedules. Moreove, a system has to remain secure even when maintained and patched by people who do not have the time to completely understand its intracacies.

Of course, that's kinda moot because of the license, which prohibits distribution of changed versions without Bernstein's approval. That's right: if Bernstein is run over by a bus, and then a security bug is found, the solution is to deinstall qmail or maintain a patch yourself. Or if an exploit is developed, you have to tell your customers 'Please turn off email until the patch is approved.' Only an idiot would ship this code commercially, which is why most OS vendors ship something else, like Sendmail. This license is just inexplicably deranged. All those years of gov't mind control rays must have fried poor djb's brain...

--
I don't want the world, I just want your half.
[ Parent ]

I didn't say qmail was beautiful... (none / 0) (#59)
by tzanger on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 08:58:35 AM EST

I'm not saying Sendmail is secure, but it *is* possible for things to improve from the late-80s level, you know.

Yeah, and they could have just fixed the Pinto instead of scrapping the design. I've got the same bad taste in my mouth about sendmail that most people older than I have about the Pinto. I'm not saying it's right; but back in the 8.8.1 (I think) days of Sendmail (I was just getting into Linux 1.x) I just got fed up with sendmail. Haven't touched it since so perhaps I was out of line to bash it now. :-)

Modern Sendmail uses the M4 macro processor for configuration.

This in itself is a major, major improvement for sendmail. It still seems like a major headache to have to use M4 (Yeah it's configurable but really that level of configuration is like using a cannon to swat a fly. I prefer qmail's style of dot-qmail files and the "natural" piping between processes in order to pick up and mangle email (and I have some pretty mangling paths! :-)

Just downloaded the qmail-1.03 tarball. The code is atrocious, and I mean 'Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure' type atrocious.

Heh, yeah that's what I meant. The comments are just not there and, while I am a BIG fan of NOT going overboard with indentation (I indent two spaces for if, 3 for for, 5 for while and 6 for switch statements), one is strange. DJB's variable names aren't useful and his license stinks but everyone's gotten around it by their patching. Check out www.qmail.org. 1.03 has been around for years.



[ Parent ]
Sendmail/qmail (none / 0) (#64)
by sigwinch on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 07:33:28 PM EST

I've got the same bad taste in my mouth about sendmail that most people older than I have about the Pinto.
Oh, I don't really *like* it either. But it works, and I do admire any program that converts its configuration file into bytecodes. ;-)
DJB's ... license stinks but everyone's gotten around it by their patching.
I can live with ugly code, as long as it has a cohesive design, is functional, and has a good security record. qmail appers to fit that bill. But the license is a killer problem, since it keeps away commercial support.

How could I recommend qmail to our IT guys? "You'll have to patch it, verify the patch, and rebuild it yourself" just doesn't fly unless the organization is huge, or the IT people are real Unix weenies.

I mean, I can go to sendmail.com and buy professional support. Red Hat, Debian, SuSE, HP, IBM, and so forth produce their own Sendmail binaries. I can buy customizations from any programming shop that cares to sell them. I can buy any number of other commercial MTAs. But for qmail it's either wait for DJB to do it, or maintain my own fork, and most organizations don't like those choices. Seriously, from a total cost of ownership basis, Microsoft Exchange is a better value for most companies than qmail, and it's just because of the license.

--
I don't want the world, I just want your half.
[ Parent ]

Commercial support (none / 0) (#66)
by tzanger on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 08:12:36 PM EST

But the license is a killer problem, since it keeps away commercial support.

You mean guys like inter7 and Crynwr aren't able to support qmail? Hell inter7 makes the KICK ASS qmailadmin and vpopmail qmail applications which make qmail's amazing virtual hosting capabilities scream.

I run vpopmail, qmailadmin and squirrelmail (and thus courier-IMAP) on the mail servers I administrate as it makes my client's lives easy. They can get their email via POP, IMAP or the web. They administrate users, aliases, forwards, autoresponders and mailing lists via the web. SMTP relaying is closed until a successful POP authentication on that IP. It's just plain old beautiful.

I didn't mean for this to turn into an ad but really if you have some time feel free to check it out. Inter7 has done some amazing work.



[ Parent ]
Re: Commercial support (none / 0) (#67)
by sigwinch on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 09:32:04 PM EST

Thanks for the links. They certainly put qmail in a different light.

--
I don't want the world, I just want your half.
[ Parent ]

KDE? (3.50 / 4) (#4)
by darthaya on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 02:39:36 PM EST

Why don't you consider KDE/qt based softwares?

I had been using Kmail for a while, and it was a wonderful piece of software that never crashes, amazingly fast and does everything very well.

I haven't tried out Evolution. But Balsa is very slow (get it from RPM) on my computer(PIII with 128 RAM). So I just use pine with color enabled. :) It looks very good <grin>

Oops (none / 0) (#5)
by darthaya on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 02:41:53 PM EST

I am sorry I didn't notice the "I have GNOME, but not KDE" part in your post. :)

But I still highly recommend Kmail!

[ Parent ]

Kmail. (none / 0) (#16)
by harb on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 06:45:26 PM EST

Kmail, like a good portion of *nix GUI MUAs, doesn't do authentication when it comes to SMTP. Not everyone in the world is an open relayer. Sort of sucks, if your mailserver is being hosted by a company, and not on a machine you control/have access to.

Pronto and Balsa also do not auth outgoing mail server. shrug. Sort of a pain. :)

harb.

bda.
[ Parent ]

KMail and SMTP (none / 0) (#23)
by PresJPolk on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 11:01:12 PM EST

Heh..

The gvim windows I have open right now have KMail support for using kio_smtp about 2/3 done.

kio_smtp can do all sorts of smtp auth, and also has the benefit of using the KDE global proxy configuration.

Combine this with the IMAP already in, and KMail should be usable by a lot more people in KDE 2.2.

[ Parent ]
SMTP authorization (none / 0) (#42)
by tzanger on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 01:42:10 PM EST

Kmail, like a good portion of *nix GUI MUAs, doesn't do authentication when it comes to SMTP. Not everyone in the world is an open relayer.

You don't have to be. I've got my server set up to allow relaying from any address which did a successful POP3 authentication in the last hour. The sales guys love that feature, since they can use any provider and not have to worry about their cut-rate provider's server not working.

Sort of sucks, if your mailserver is being hosted by a company, and not on a machine you control/have access to.

True, but the ISP I do technical work at runs the same system I have set up here at my day job. There's no "need" to have SMTP authorization in order to allow selective relaying from unknown IPs.

Finally, it doesn't sound like it'd take much in order to submit a patch to give kmail that possibility. :-) (gd&r)



[ Parent ]
no imap (none / 0) (#18)
by dash2 on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 09:16:11 PM EST

Kmail doesn't have IMAP support yet, anyway, if you need that... although it is coming in 2.2.

dave
------------------------
If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.
[ Parent ]

Mulberry from Cyrusoft! (3.66 / 3) (#6)
by ebunga on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 03:11:59 PM EST

If you are using IMAP, you should definitely go for Mulberry. Sure, it isn't open source, and will actuall cost you a whole $35, it is definitely worth it. I've been using it for quite some time now, and have been happy. One great thing about Mulberry, is that it even supports modifying of IMAP mailbox ACL's. Sure, it isn't very pretty, but what is more important to you? Making your mail client have transparent backgrounds, shiny buttons, and silly stuff, or something that actually works like it should? See http://www.cyrusoft.com/ for all the details.



I just tried mulberry (none / 0) (#60)
by tzanger on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 09:03:10 AM EST

One word: UGH. It's as bad as Eudora.

What's not to like?

  • I can't stand having to open an email; that's what the preview pane is for.
  • No POP3 support
  • It feels "unorganized" -- click here, tap there, double click here and you have an email.

It is being actively developed though and that means something in a big way. I just can't understand why people are all trying to go after the "click to open a message" way of mail readers. I love my Outlook Express because of its three-pane design and relative flow and method of use. I hate my Outlook Express because of the ass-backwards keyboard shortcuts, security problems, proprietary mailbox formats and general unchangingness of these aspects.



[ Parent ]
Yet another option (3.50 / 4) (#7)
by rjh on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 03:28:36 PM EST

You will find numerous possible configurations, each with users that really like them. I personally use:
- fetchmail/procmail to deal with multiple accounts on multiple hosts
- TkRat for reading and sending mail.
This is mostly because I found this combination the most personally pleasing. I also liked the absence of dependency on the KDE or Gnome monsters. I prefer the slightly more spartan world of WindowMaker.

The subject of favored email agents is much like the subject of preferred automobiles. There will be a wide variety of needs, a wide variety of best fits, and many strong opinions. I wish there was a nice location that provided summary descriptions of the many alternatives, together with links and unbiased ratings of strengths and weaknesses. It would help explain to the novices that there is not one perfect and only appropriate choice, and it would help people pick a mailer that is close to what they personally need.

Evolution (3.50 / 4) (#8)
by deroy on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 03:35:12 PM EST

I personally have used Evolution as my primary MUA for several months now. It does crash once in a while, but I have NEVER lost a single message. WRT storage formats, Evolution supports both mbox and maildir.

On top of that, if you have problems, developers are constantly helping out on the Evolution email list.

Give it a try; you'll probably like it!

deroy

Red-Carpet + Evolution (2.50 / 6) (#9)
by FlinkDelDinky on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 03:39:22 PM EST

Point #1
Linux doesn't tell me anything! Even if it did I would need the version number. So I'm going to assume you're running redhat or debian.

You may want to go to Ximian's page and install red-carpet. Through red-carpet subscribe to the Evolution Snapshot channel. Run red-carpet every other day and there will always be an update available.

Features are being added all the time. It's pretty cool software. I can't figure out how to delete folders though.

Sorry! (none / 0) (#10)
by Mendax Veritas on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 04:01:39 PM EST

Originally I described my software setup in more detail, but it got lost during editing. I'm running Debian Woody with unstable GNOME from Ximian.

[ Parent ]
Shouldn't matter (none / 0) (#47)
by regeya on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 04:51:10 PM EST

With the non-commercial stuff, as long as you have a mainstream-ish distro you shouldn't have to worry too much. If you're looking for easy solutions for your particular distro, then you might have to be picky.

Anyway, the original poster was just being an ass. :-)

[ yokelpunk | kuro5hin diary ]
[ Parent ]

(ot) deleting folders (1.00 / 1) (#13)
by cicero on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 05:27:56 PM EST

you need to delete the folder in $HOME/evoltion/local/<folder name> via rm or some such. and then restart evo. -Peter


--
I am sorry Cisco, for Microsoft has found a new RPC flaw - tonight your e0 shall be stretched wide like goatse.
[ Parent ]
wtf? (5.00 / 1) (#26)
by klamath on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 12:18:10 AM EST

Linux doesn't tell me anything! Even if it did I would need the version number. So I'm going to assume you're running redhat or debian.
WTF? The version number? That doesn't matter at all -- it's not like some mail client won't run on Linux 2.0.x, or even Linux 1.x. It makes practically no difference to the actual application (assuming we're dealing with regular, 'desktop' GUI apps that don't do anything too unusual -- like email clients; obviously, with more advanced/low-level software it's a different ballgame).

As for the distro, that really doesn't matter either. Your suggestion, Evolution, runs on pretty much every distro under the sun, as well as several UNIX variants. I'd challenge you to find a piece of software that runs on 1 Linux distro, but not another (caveats: non commercial (because they only support a couple distros, and release in binary-only), and non-distro-oriented: i.e. a GUI for apt-get or something like that).

Finally, I've found Evolution to be shakey at best. It's pretty neat and has a lot of promise, but it's slow, and has crashed on me several times. I probably wouldn't trust it with my mail.

[ Parent ]

I have a similar problem. (4.00 / 5) (#11)
by Inoshiro on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 04:34:15 PM EST

I've used IMAP email for central storage since 1998 on my LAN, but I've been let down by all the pathetic "/var/spool/mail pop3 pollers" email clients that are in abundance on Freshmeat. No one has 1) imap support which works, and 2) ssl support on top of that.

I can run a local copy of stunnel to wrap the imap client, if I need to. But still, nothing beats Netscape 4 for IMAP w/ SSL support in Linux. And that's sad, because Netscape 4 is a rather old, crufty, and pathetic mail client. The only reason it is still #1 is because no one seems capable of writing a nice IMAP supporting mail client. They always write something with stores mail in /var/spool/mail, polls pop3 servers... maybe they jam on IMAP support as an after thought, but it's always decrepit and doesn't work with subfolders.



--
[ イノシロ ]
How about Mutt? (4.00 / 2) (#15)
by Michael Leuchtenburg on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 05:29:53 PM EST

Mutt supports IMAP/SSL. I haven't used it myself, but I'm told it's quite good. Of course it's text based... but I don't consider that to be a bad thing as it's more easily accessed remotely.

[ #k5: dyfrgi ]
[ TINK5C ]
[ Parent ]
But I already have remote access... (none / 0) (#58)
by Inoshiro on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 06:04:04 AM EST

In the form of SSL-secured webmail :) IMAP nicely fits into that niche, since it's all server side. It really felt great to be able to securely check my email while at LWE a few months back.

The last time I checked MUTT, the IMAP support was so unstable and horrible as to make me fear for my years of archived email. I doubt that will change significantly for at least 2 years.



--
[ イノシロ ]
[ Parent ]
Althea (3.00 / 1) (#30)
by neonman on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 01:46:47 AM EST

A friend of mine is a developer on the Althea project. They are writing a GTK-based IMAP client and it has recieved fairly good responces from its users. I'm not sure what your needs are entirely, but check it out: althea.sourceforge.net

_________________________
Aaron Grogan
aaron@stufflikethat.org
http://stufflikethat.org/
[ Parent ]
I looked at that project earlier.. (none / 0) (#57)
by Inoshiro on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 06:00:38 AM EST

I don't think they're stable, nor do they have the all-important SSL support. :(



--
[ イノシロ ]
[ Parent ]
Why do you insist that it has to be graphical? (3.50 / 10) (#12)
by Estanislao Martínez on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 04:52:49 PM EST

I'd really like to know. I find graphical clients to be nothing but underpowered, lowest-common-denominator and inconvenient software, which to boot I can't access over text-only links.

I go with a mutt/procmail/shell script/fetchmail combination that perfectly handles the masses of email I get (I am subscribed to around 35 lists of varying volume), and sorts stuff out into folders (I have 122 mail folders, in maildir format). If I had to abandon this setup, I would go crazy.

The other thing I'd like to know is whether you require filtering and handling of different accounts to be a feature of your email client. Fetchmail can grab mail from your accounts and deliver them it in your local machine; mutt can be set up to recognize your different "To:" addresses and use the appropriate "From:" in replies from different accounts. Procmail filters email by regular expressions; though its config syntax is stupid (I stick to it because that way I can migrate my setup between Unix boxes easily), there are other mail filtering programs which are easier.

Really, with a small investment of time and effort, these tools make for an amazingly powerful email setup which you can ssh to from anywhere.

--em

True (3.75 / 4) (#14)
by Mendax Veritas on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 05:29:19 PM EST

Well, I already know about mutt, procmail, and fetchmail. I've used them before. The question really is whether there are graphical tools that don't suck. I like graphical mail clients because you can easily have several messages open at once in different windows, you can see image attachments inline, etc. But if I can't find anything acceptable in a GUI, I'll go back to using console tools.

[ Parent ]
Multiple windows (none / 0) (#55)
by kmself on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 10:10:42 PM EST

In an X session, pop open a few extra terminal windows with mail sessions in them. I've hot-keyed <alt><shift>-M to do this for me in WindowMaker.

In a terminal session (e.g.: you're remotely sshd to your box), screen allows you to multiplex a single console window.

Still a gain over GUI, IMO.

--
Karsten M. Self
SCO -- backgrounder on Caldera/SCO vs IBM
Support the EFF!!
There is no K5 cabal.
[ Parent ]

No need to get that fancy... (4.00 / 1) (#25)
by warpeightbot on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 12:01:01 AM EST

I use pine 4.33, which I tampered with slightly to work with OpenSSL (it's a two-line change in Makefile.ssl, use find to find the file) to access my ISP's IMAP4/SSL server and slurp my mail down over a secure link. Pine now does some filtering as well, no shell scripts or procmail needed. I don't handle near the volume of mail Senor Martinez does, but for what I do get (10-15 a day or so) I love it.

While a good GUI mailer would be neat, I've found that plain old text is, as of this moment, the fastest way to chew thru a bunch of email. Oh, I forgot to mention, Pine has a very powerful "select" capability, that allows you to do a single operation on a large and fairly arbitrary body of messages simultaneously... which IMHO makes up for the fact that you can't drag and drop. Pine with a full-height xterm makes for a VERY fast mailbox cleanout.

Oh, and you can run the same client under WinDoze, too... although I don't think there's SSL or LDAP support under PC-Pine.

[ Parent ]

Interesting info (5.00 / 2) (#29)
by RadiantMatrix on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 01:44:27 AM EST

Under the heading of Just so You Know, you can effectively use mutt to acheive everything you mention, or a combination of fetchmail, mutt, and procmail (which is really less complex than it sounds).

Using Mutt alone, IMAP4 is supported, and SSL can be complied in using the international versions. POP3 is also supported, as is Kerberos. Mutt itself doesn't filter mail, AFAIK, but simply using procmail or some other easy-to-setup MDA works great. Mutt allows you do pipe incoming messages through the MDA first. Mutt international versions also have support for gnupg and PGP built in (you still need to have one of these installed, of course).

Using the Fetchmail/Procmail/Mutt configuration is great, too. (actually, my mail runs through postfix first, but that's because I directly receive mail as well as fetchmail it) Fetchmail supports IMAP/POP/Kerberos/SSL, you name it, and is likely to be one of the first things to support new protocols that may evolve. It also allows for many mail accounts of differing protocols, and is highly configurable -- moreso than any MUA I've ever encountered.

Procmail is a little strange at first, but if you are familiar with regexp already, then you will have no difficulty after quickly browsing the man pages. Once your mail is properly filtered off, Mutt can read your mail, adapt your From: (and/or any other) header based on the folder you're in, the To: field of the message you're replying to, or nearly any other rule you can dream up. Mutt does remarkably well with MIME, even being able to launch appropriate viewers for each type (with a little config work). Mutt also allows you to use whatever editor you choose to compose mail.

Not trying to be a Mutt zealot, Pine is actually very nice, but I thought I'd point out how flexible a multi-part system can be.
--
I'm not going out with a "meh". I plan to live, dammit. [ZorbaTHut]

[ Parent ]

Pine (5.00 / 1) (#44)
by Estanislao Martínez on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 02:44:41 PM EST

Pine is known to have been coded in an extremely non-security conscious way, to have had exploits in the past, and to be likely to have plenty in the future. (I remember last year there was some discussion in the FreeBSD lists of marking the pine4 port as 'BROKEN'-- which means that whenever a user tries to build it, they get a message recommending them not to, unless they set the appropriate environment variable, because of issues like this.)

Also, it doesn't support Kerberos POP, right? So I can't access my main account securely, a major requirement for me.

It probably makes up for all of this by being so easy to use, though...

--em
[ Parent ]

Re: Pine code quality (none / 0) (#49)
by sigwinch on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 05:36:23 PM EST

Pine is known to have been coded in an extremely non-security conscious way, to have had exploits in the past, and to be likely to have plenty in the future.
I looked at the Pine code for some reason a while back, and it's just amazingly ugly and hard to read, not to mention poorly conceived and organized. I'd rather work on XFree86 than Pine. I'm currently looking for a replacement to use before the next exploit goes public.
It probably makes up for all of this by being so easy to use, though...
Yup. That's the only reason I haven't switched to something else.

--
I don't want the world, I just want your half.
[ Parent ]

Two suggestions (4.00 / 2) (#17)
by kaboom on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 09:05:42 PM EST

<Note: I don't actually use either anymore. I used to, but I've since found that I really must have a command-line MUA some of the time, and it's more comfortable for me to use the same MUA always, so....> I'd suggest you try either TkRat or its slightly more GUI offsprint Postilion. Both are highly functional; about the only feature that they don't have, AFAIK, is maildir support.

Has anyone seen... (3.00 / 1) (#19)
by Paradocis on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 09:18:53 PM EST

...an email and groupware app for linux that can fully connect to and utilize all the features of an MS Exchange server like Outlook does?


-=<Paradocis>=-
+++++++++++++++++++++
"El sueńo de la razon produce monstruos." -Goya
+++++++++++++++++++++


Talking to Exchange with Linux (4.00 / 2) (#24)
by warpeightbot on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 11:48:18 PM EST

Both Netscape and Pine (with LDAP support compiled in) will access Exchange's IMAP backend and the LDAP addressbook gateway. If you want to use Schedule+, I think you're outta luck, as far as mail and addresses and MIME and all that, I used both Netscape 4.08(?) and Pine 3.96 for almost a year back in '99 talking to an NT server, and the head network idiot (NT bigot) was never the wiser. ('course, you should have NS 4.76 and Pine 4.33 now, but that's how long they've had that level of support.)

[ Parent ]
i don't like the subject field (3.50 / 2) (#20)
by vsync on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 09:21:59 PM EST

  • I used XFMail for some time and found it to be useful and of decent quality.
  • I used VM for a while and now use Gnus inside XEmacs (gtk-xemacs, to be specific).
    • VM is decent, but Gnus seems to do better at handling weird noncompliant MIME stuff. (At Sun, I worked with people who used mailtool and dtmail for everything. *shudder*)
    • The single-threadedness isn't as much of an issue, because you seem to be misled by the idea that the mail client itself must poll for new messages. I use asMail, but there are other pollers out there. when new mail comes in, then you tell your client to download it.
    • Having the mail client in emacs is more useful than you'd imagine. Everything is a buffer, and you can yank between them and such. The keystrokes are all the same, and all the Emacs Lisp functionality is available to you.


--
"The problem I had with the story, before I even finished reading, was the copious attribution of thoughts and ideas to vsync. What made it worse was the ones attributed to him were the only ones that made any sense whatsoever."
Evolution (4.00 / 3) (#21)
by toddmilburn on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 10:41:29 PM EST

I installed evolution the other day. It's really still in beta form. To get it to install you need to update all sorts of libraries. Gettting the right versions and getting them to compile is a 'treat'.

If you do go to all the effort, you'll find evolution to be really reliable, it worked great with my imap mailbox. It's still buggy, but it's not like you weren't warned.

Polarbar Mailer (3.00 / 3) (#22)
by www.sorehands.com on Mon Apr 02, 2001 at 10:52:06 PM EST

This is an all Java mail client. It originally came as a commercial product, but then released when the company could not support it.

Try http://www.polarbar.org



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.barbieslapp.com
Mattel, SLAPP terrorists intent on destroying free speech.
-----------------------------------------------------------

palm synchronization (3.50 / 2) (#27)
by dnuoforp on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 01:16:45 AM EST

I'm undergoing a similar dillemma at the moment. My primary requirement is address book, calendar, todo list, and email all integrated into one application (or at least multiple applications that can share the same address book) and (this is the most important thing) can synchronize with my palm. I'm going to install staroffice anyway for my desktop publishing, so i was considering using their PIM software since it is advertised to do all of the above. any other similar programs out there?

Jpilot + pilot-link (none / 0) (#40)
by chewie on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 01:36:38 PM EST

I use Jpilot for my calandar/todo/notes/address book application. It's a reverse-eng. lookalike to the Palm Desktop application. Email can be sync'd by using the pilot-link tools. Yes, command line, but nice enough. Otherwise, look into the gnome PIM conduits. You can sync to just about anything. If you like plan(1) for your calandar app, you can sync with that. etc.etc.etc...
assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */
[ Parent ]
Staroffice email bug (none / 0) (#62)
by orthox on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 06:44:31 PM EST

I have had problems with an older staroffice version (5.1 it think). I was using it for email for mulitple accounts. One day (may have been related to a config change) it decided to start missing emails. Not downloading them anymore. It would download one or two from each account each day, but left many on the pop servers. When I noticed something was up i changed clients and ended up downloading dozens of emails that were never downloaded from as far back as a 3 months prior.

[ Parent ]
I use sylpheed (4.00 / 3) (#28)
by ramses0 on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 01:37:20 AM EST

It can be found here. It acts a lot like MS OE, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

According to the latest change-log:

  • SMTP AUTH is supported.
  • Move and remove are enabled in IMAP4.
Both of which can be helpful.

Its mail-filtering is merely adequate, but it's a nice bridge application if you don't need to 80 line procmail scripts. :^)= If I were going to set up a linux box for my geeky friends coming from windows, Sylpheed would be the mail client, Mozilla 0.8.1 would be the browser, and they'd have to be on their own as far as WM/Desktop to use.

Never used KMail or Evolution, although they both sound nice. I'd really like to try Pronto! because it uses an SQL backed to store messages. I can't help but think that is incredibly useful.

--Robert
[ rate all comments , for great justice | sell.com ]

And here's a review of it. (none / 0) (#53)
by static on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 08:35:10 PM EST

Joe Barr at LinuxWorld did a review of Sylpheed.

Wade.

[ Parent ]

As do I (none / 0) (#74)
by tonyk on Tue Apr 10, 2001 at 10:39:09 PM EST

I have found Sylpheed to be an excellent email program, easily the best I've used in Unix. It has many features, and more are being added. So far it is the only one that does everything I want - email address completion, filtering, sensible handling of html mails (who was the idiot that came up with this concept?). All in all, a program worthy of support.

[ Parent ]
Balsa ; using an external editor (3.00 / 3) (#31)
by rafael on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 02:45:14 AM EST

I think that balsa (v1.1.3, that I use) supports multiple POP accounts. I haven't tried it tough. Also it supports filtering mail with procmail, which is useful to dispatch incoming mail from different sources into different folders.

I've a question : is there a GTK or GNOME MUA that supports editing posts with an external editor (say, vi)?

Mahogany can (none / 0) (#51)
by VZ on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 06:29:07 PM EST

Actually, you can either launch it manually or set an option to always use it for composing - this is what I do (using gvim for everything, it's a pity I can't write this reply in it)

[ Parent ]
Thanks for all the comments! (5.00 / 2) (#32)
by Mendax Veritas on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 03:42:22 AM EST

Thanks to everyone for all their advice. Having explored further this evening, and followed many of the links that people have provided, I've decided to try a setup in which I use fetchmail and procmail to store my incoming mail into an MH-style folder tree which will be accessible from both Sylpheed (when I'm at home) and Mutt (when I'm coming in through ssh). This way I have the nice UI when possible, but I can still access my mail remotely, and I always have high-quality mail filtering. (I'm sure one could work out a scheme in which X is tunneled through ssh to allow me to use my home installation of Sylpheed remotely, but I shudder at the thought.) I may follow up on this in my K5 diary in days to come.

I use the same... (none / 0) (#39)
by chewie on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 01:24:51 PM EST

...without the GUI. ;-) Just mutt+fetchmail+procmail+postfix. ;-) Works very well.
assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */
[ Parent ]
fetchmail->procmail->newbie-friendly-mua? (none / 0) (#72)
by mdavids on Fri Apr 06, 2001 at 09:55:40 PM EST

I started using fetchmail/procmail/mutt just a couple of weeks ago, and I'm a convert. I'm involved in a project that recycles old hardware, so I'm looking around for a simple ncurses mail reader that's a little more newbie-friendly than mutt. I figure even a 386 can handle web (using Links) and email in text mode, and that's ninety-odd percent of what you want a computer for. Problem is, the arcane keybindings and inscrutable interface of mutt will put people off. Anybody know of a mutt-alike with some sort of menu interface?



[ Parent ]
Are you sure about MH folders? (5.00 / 1) (#45)
by Estanislao Martínez on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 02:52:09 PM EST

I used to have all my folders in MH. MH is pretty much the only client that will deal properly with MH folders. Mutt can read them, but doesn't really like them-- it can't use the .sequences file, and thus, there is no way to distinguish read messages from new messages.

Consider using maildirs instead...

--em
[ Parent ]

Maildir is king (none / 0) (#54)
by kcarnold on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 09:12:33 PM EST

I see no reason any more to use anything but maildir. mutt knew about it for a long time, and many other clients now support it also. Most every decent mailer supports it, and the format is very simple, so adding support for it to almost any program is bordering on trivial. The key Maildir advantage is reliability. If some errant bad block fsck's a major block of your harddrive, that really big mbox file is likely gone. Cya. Bye-bye. Maildir is a bunch of small files, one for each message, which fits better with the Unix philosophy anyway (much easier for scripts to deal with) and makes a catastrophic disk failure much less likely to corrupt your mail out of existence. Back when my hard drive used to do really ungodly things to my data (I've since upgraded a bunch of stuff and that's all gone away, even though I'm running ATA100 on a VIA KT133 ;), and maildir was the obvious choice. I see no reason to switch back to mbox now that I have those issues resolved, and many reasons to stay with maildir.

Maildir over MH -- I dunno for sure, but it has been remarked that Maildir is always safe over NFS mounts or multiple processes without locking and MH isn't quite there, and maildir's simple, sane format makes it easy to deal with in other programs.

[ Parent ]
MH vs. maildir (5.00 / 1) (#56)
by Estanislao Martínez on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 12:53:03 AM EST

Maildir over MH -- I dunno for sure, but it has been remarked that Maildir is always safe over NFS mounts or multiple processes without locking and MH isn't quite there, and maildir's simple, sane format makes it easy to deal with in other programs.

One of the things I'm banking on, actually, is that somebody will write a MH-style command line suite for maildir. There's already a project doing this, but I don't know what progress it's making (if any).

Why is this such a big deal? I quote from that page:

But I said maildirs are fully concurrent. That means that any number of other processes can also access your mail folder, without causing collisions. You can have an archiver which indexes email from the boss. You can have a cleaner archive and delete old email. You can have any number of automatic email processing programs, plus any number of open mailreader sessions, all running at once, and all unable to step on each others toes.
For people or systems who manage large amounts of email, this is a big thing-- you can have cron scripts doing all sorts of things periodically to your email unobtrusively. The possibilities are just endless.

--em
[ Parent ]

Also worth a look:EXMH (3.00 / 1) (#33)
by Apuleius on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 06:00:36 AM EST

It's written in TCL and is very low-footprint, has email presorting, and most of the other features you would want in a client.


There is a time and a place for everything, and it's called college. (The South Park chef)
Aethera (3.00 / 1) (#34)
by erotus on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 06:23:58 AM EST

Well, it seems nobody has mentioned Aethera yet.(at least I didn't notice any mention of it)
http://www.thekompany.com/projects/aethera/

I see that you are using gnome and that evolution might the choice for your environment. As long as you have the proper Qt libs then you can run aethera. It promises to be a featureful mail client. Really though, both these clients look very promising and I predict that both will be the new hot killer apps to grace peoples desktops.

Evolution that actually works (4.00 / 1) (#35)
by leonbrooks on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 07:24:05 AM EST

Grab the latest Mandrake-8 beta (Beta3), which comes with a working Evolution 0.9; all of the libraries are sorted out for you, KDE 2.1.1 is included along with a whole pile of other goodies such as a 2.4 kernel.

It's a lot easier to get working than biological or chemical evolution. You don't need your mutations to swim upstream, for example. (-:

I've stuck with Mozilla mail until something clearly better comes along (and must be graphical as well, 'coz I get HTML, DOC and PDFs in the mix), and I think this better thing will be the Evolution mailer, when I next update my machine.
-- If at first you don't succeed, try a shorter bungee

Gnus (4.00 / 1) (#36)
by WWWWolf on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 08:55:43 AM EST

My choice of the day is Gnus. I read my Usenet news with it, and would read my mail too but won't do that right now (mutt works, no need to change)...

That client does everything. Not just mail and news... it even has nnslashdot to read The Other Site.

Be sure to run it in XEmacs, preferrably the GTK+ version of it. Looks good, has menus, toolbars, context menus and everything. A good choice. Oh, and reads HTML mail too and supports MC (the PGP/GnuPG interface) out of box =)

-- Weyfour WWWWolf, a lupine technomancer from the cold north...


Where it's at (two turntables and a microphone) (3.00 / 1) (#38)
by ubu on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 10:47:42 AM EST

The Website for the GTK+ version of XEmacs is at http://www.cs.indiana.edu/elisp/gui-xemacs/.

Ubu


--
As good old software hats say - "You are in very safe hands, if you are using CVS !!!"
[ Parent ]
Pronto (3.00 / 1) (#37)
by muhri on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 09:49:57 AM EST

Being the author of Pronto & having read the discuession, I'd like to say a few things :) Pronto! doesn't support authintication on SMTP, TRUE because I never had access to a server that does authintication or requires authintication, I'd like to get access to one and immediate support for this will be coded. As far as POP authintication, it does support APOP. Pronto! is not a mail client for everyone. Its for the power user, it stores your emails in an SQL db and basically has lots of features that you guys dont know about, for example, I use 1 mysql server and many pronto's on different machines to connect to that server. So its like having your "shell client" everywhere with you, as if you were sshing & using mutt. Also it includes a console client (not nearly as advanced as mutt) but if u have a gui pronto setup, then all u need to do is run the cpronto proggie and you are all set. As far as IMAP support goes, i am working on it. Having said that, give Pronto a spin, download the installer and try it, if u really like it, use it with a real db ala mysql/pg and enjoy powerful/fast/feature full filtering + regex gui client :)

I've got the same problem! (3.50 / 2) (#43)
by tzanger on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 01:56:26 PM EST

I use Outlook Express now. Not because it's a model of security, but because it works extremely well. It's rather silly to run Win4Lin just to get a decent email/news client though.

My needs for a graphical (yes graphical) mail and optinally news reader is similar:

  • three-pane
  • filtering
  • IMAP, POP and SMTP
  • thread highlighting
  • inline graphic viewer
  • keyboard acceleration
  • LDAP-capable for address book

That really isn't much to ask, now is it?

As far as news readers go, I have about 120 megs of news (palm.programmer.*, most importantly) with flags, watched threads and so on in OE. I've gotta figure a way to get that into something pan or the KDE news reader (knode?) can understand because I won't lose that for anything. Shame on me for using OE but that's what was available. Agent simply is not a nice mail/news reader and neither is Eudora so OE got the job.

An aside: I'd *love* to see IE5 and OE for Linux. Despite what the zealots say they are really decent applications. Sure they have some weirdness (lack of (sane) keyboard acceleration, shitty proprietary binary file formats) but with those few indiscretions cleaned out of them they would be absolutely the best. It's sad that the Linux community can't just say "Yeah, they're really good" and aim to better them. I'm trying but I'm no apps programmer. I've subitted a few patches to licq and so on but I'm more of an embedded guy. With time, perhaps.



Outlook Express's killer bug (none / 0) (#70)
by Sean Hope on Thu Apr 05, 2001 at 10:29:20 PM EST

I too use OE, because I couldn't find anything else that I liked... but anyway I am switching away from it because of one killer bug.... it loses mail!

It has happened to me 3 times in the last 3 weeks or so that it just loses an entire folder worth of mail. Inexcusable.

[ Parent ]
Ximian question (2.00 / 1) (#46)
by mindstrm on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 04:34:31 PM EST

... I can't help but wonder.

Is Ximian somehow related to Simeon? They sound similar, and the icon style on the web pages sounds similar...

Simeon was a standards-compliant MUA, that was completely cross-platform, and looked to be good.. but couldn't keep up with Eudora and such, so never really got off the ground.

Is this the same thing?

Mahogany might be good choice for IMAP (3.00 / 1) (#50)
by VZ on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 05:48:08 PM EST

As (one of two) author(s) of Mahogany I obviously can't be completely fair, but I think that Mahogany is going to be one of the best choices for IMAP client soon. Right now it still has several problems (too slow, no PGP/GPG support, no HTML support) but it has full support for IMAP and SMTP (including authentification), MIME (mixed, multipart, whatever) and much more - not mentioning its main feature, that it is cross-platform (currently Win32/Unix only, but maybe Mac too) and so you can use the same settings, folders and address books on different platforms.

To reply to your questions: it does support multiple accounts (and multiple identities which are different things for us) and filters can be written in Python.

It should be safe to try right now (it is slow but it doesn't lose messages), so have a look. And if you like what ou see you're welcome to join the development!

Mahongany updates.. (none / 0) (#69)
by Inoshiro on Thu Apr 05, 2001 at 02:24:55 AM EST

For me at lesat, no HTML support is a plus! ;) How is your code organized? If your app does indeed properly handle IMAP, I'd be interested in getting good GPG and SSL support into it. Properly setup, I could finally get rid of crunky old NS4 as my mail client.



--
[ イノシロ ]
[ Parent ]
XFMail (3.00 / 1) (#52)
by lucid on Tue Apr 03, 2001 at 08:26:40 PM EST

I've only seen one mention of XFmail, which I think would meet your requirements. I've been using it for a year or so, and haven't had any real problems with it. It seems to be a pretty decent graphical email client. Of course, it gets its ass kicked by PMMail/2 for OS/2, but so does any other email client.

Same Situation (none / 0) (#61)
by digitaltraveller on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 09:44:09 AM EST

I was in the same situation a few months ago. I found mozilla intolerable and alot of other buggy free software. My needs were pretty much the same as yours but with good support for gpg.

The best mua for me turned out to be KDE Kmail. It had some bugs related to attachments but the authors respond to bugs very quickly and upgrading got rid of the few minor problems I did have. The authors have did a nice job and I'd put it at the top of my list. But Evolution will be good too...Can't wait to see it.

cscmail (none / 0) (#63)
by orthox on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 06:53:14 PM EST

Since it hasn't been mentioned yet, cscmail seems pretty good so far.

It's a bit slow with lots of email messages (~1000) but i'm not using the db storage option, so it could get faster. It can import existing common email files. It doesn't (i think) support imap, but its written in perl, so it shouldn't be hard to add. It crashes once in a while, and formats everything as html for display, but it's the most flexible solution i have tried, and it doesn't require the download of all sorts of extra libs and packages to run (like some of the Gnome based apps i've tried to install).

I figure i'll use it until i'm done writing my own.

cscmail == pronto (3.00 / 1) (#71)
by mdavids on Fri Apr 06, 2001 at 08:10:48 PM EST

cscmail is now called pronto. It's pretty cool, but if you're storing your email as csv files it's slow, and prone to crashing, losing data as it goes. I stopped using it for this reason.



[ Parent ]
cscmail != Pronto (4.00 / 1) (#73)
by muhri on Mon Apr 09, 2001 at 04:48:07 AM EST

I'm sorry you are wrong.. CscMail != Pronto.. Pronto was branched from CSCmail and since then has changed dramatically and in no way associated with CSCMail , matter of fact in the code they are almost completely different beasts.. They may look a bit a like although the interface was changed and customized to extreme. I do agree that CSV sucks though and that you are better off using a db base backend, CSV is alright for < 500 msgs store and It doesn't lose data - it has problems but it doesn't lose data - None of the users had reported losing data with CSV, they just reported annoyance and I always advised switching to mysql or Pg if you are serious about using Pronto. It'll be a heck of a lot faster and full of functionalities that you dont have if you only use CSV. Thats why I say Pronto! is not a mailer for everyone, its for some one who is serious about thier mail and like the idea of a db backend.

[ Parent ]
I enjoy Kmail... (none / 0) (#65)
by juln on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 07:40:19 PM EST

I hve been using kmail 1.99 for some time now, and it has been great for me. it is a simple Eudora-like client. I am not sure about the exportability of the messages, but importation of netscape mail was straightforward. I noticed kmail works better with postfix than some other smtp programs. Also, I am using it with gnome... I used apt-get to obtain kmail, and I don't have kdebase or konqueror installed, or khtml... but it seems to work fine , anyhow, yippee.

give gmail a shot (none / 0) (#68)
by datazone on Wed Apr 04, 2001 at 11:34:49 PM EST

Its just like pronto in that it uses a real database to store your mail, no imap support is there, and i cant promise you that it will be there one day, but if you ask wayne nicely :)

gmail.linuxpower.org

Which graphical email client for Linux? | 74 comments (74 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest © 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!