MUA's vs. local mail
>>>>> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> I do know many of the GUI MUAs are incomplete jack-jobs that fail to
> add a handler for local system folders (i.e. were only partially
> ported to Linux). I am not sure which would be the better aproach to
> deal with this deficiency.
Recommends: dovecot-imapd, and let the MUA's use imap://[::1]/
Please also note that dovecot-imapd is perfectly runnable even
without special privileges, and even without a real network
socket (a pipe is just fine.) In particular, my Gnus/Emacs
setup has the following server's definition:
;; FIXME: use nnimap-shell-program here
That way, Gnus is also unaware of my system's password.
Contrary to having a MUA access local mail directly, Dovecot
will cache certain headers, thus allowing the list of messages
to be prepared rather quickly. For the larger mailboxes, there
may be a really huge difference between using Maildir + Dovecot
vs. a MUA that accesses a Unix mbox file directly.
FSF associate member #7257