[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Offline mail reader for several lists



On Wed, 6 Dec 2000 08:21:58 +0100, Michael Meskes <meskes@debian.org> said:
>On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 09:30:18PM -0600, Timmy Douglas wrote:
>> >I could maybe (tips how?) use fetchmail to check all folders to which
>> >procmail delivers mail and forward the new ones home, deleting them on the
>> >work machine. But at home I may want to delete (most of) the new messages,
>> >keep a few in the different folders, maybe even administer my folders at
>> >home, moving a few messages around and then write back the changes to the
>> >folders to my work machine.
>> 
>> I don't think you understand the mail process. Maybe you do, but here
>> is how I believe it works by default:
>> 
>> The mail is stored in a POP3 server.
>
>I don't think POP3 is what he's looking for. He needs an IMAP4 server and an
>offline capable mail client.

ok. I don't know much about IMAP4...

>> Your machine downloads the mail from that POP3 server with fetchmail.
>
>Of course you can do that. But then you need rsync or something like that to
>have the very same mail boxes on your office machine. As far as I understood
>Nils mail we are not talking about some server but about his office machine
>where he also sits at from time to time and wants to see the same set of
>email as on his home machine.
>
>Since sending mail is a matter of your sendmail/postfix/exim setup it simply
>comes down to "which mail reader is capable of synchronising with imap4
>while on-line and can give you full access to the cached boxes while
>off-line"?
>
>I know StarOffice can, but are there others? In fact I'd be very interested
>in this too. Not having time to look up all mail clients I worked around
>this by installing an IMAP4 server on my home machine as well, so I only
>have to sync the Maildir.

if i had to keep two mailboxes equal like this i would probably use
ssh... but then again, if i knew imap4, i would be able to think of
something better.



Reply to: