> > You mean #82908? IMHO, and the author obviously agrees, mail.services is
> > a simple and elegant solution -- it is your mail server that is broken.
> > AFAICT, the only relevant part of the bug is editing headers with arrows.
> I guess I will try this new version once it hits the archives (in i386) and
> play with mail.services if I find some documentation to/for(?) that.
Didn't upstream explain it? Just write
to ~/.elm/mail.services. This works on PL95 as well.
> It's not my mail server.
("My" isn't strictly about ownership. You can say "damn, missed my
train" and it doesn't mean you own the railroad. :-)
> It is (well, was, because I don't use it anymore much)
> pop3.SoftHome.Net and I don't understand why should they support
> IMAP or not have it blocked for me to have working Elm? That
> doesn't really make sense.
I didn't say they should support IMAP. The server is broken in the
sense it doesn't return "Connection refused."
> Server should be able to respond to pop3 and nothing else and, in my
> quite humble opinion, Elm should still work and be able to connect
> to its POP3 service (port).
But it does! You just need to specify POP3 since guessing it is not
possible in this case.
> Thanks for your time and devotion to Debian! I was afraid there would be no
> updates to Elm in Debian. I may get together one day and find some package
> to take care of (like elm-me+) instead of just filing bugs and annoy
> developers with them.
Looking forward to it. :-)