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

Bug#82908: http://people.debian.org/~vela/elm-me+/00-debian.diff

petr@hudec.name writes:

> > 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

  pop3.SoftHome.Net pop

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. :-)



Reply to: