> I have been using KMail for some time on my Woody system. It seems to do
> alright, but after following some of the threads, I have been considering
> going to something like Mutt. In fact, I reinstalled Mutt and have been
> experimenting with it.
Good. :)
> However, I'm not sure whether I need to make this change or not.. My
> system is strictly a single-user one. I do have Exim installed, and it
> handles in-system messages, but as of yet, don't have it configured to do
> fetchmail/sendmail.. I simply deal directly with my POP server. And,
> AFAICT, Mutt can download mail directly, from remote, but cannot send
> there.
My system is also standalone. You configure Exim through 'eximconfig'.
Here's a pattern. When sending mail:
Mutt -> Exim -> ISP/POP server.
Receiving mail:
POP server -> fetchmail -> exim -> mutt.
(any comments?)
> So, would it be worthwhile for me to convert?
Worthwhile, yes.
> One of the incentives is the
> fact that Mutt is "modern" in the way it deals with inline attachements,
> etc.. and it appears that KMail isn't.. Also, if I do switch, would it be
> best to let Exim do all the mail downloads as well as uploads, or would it
> be just as well to let Mutt fetch the mail and simply let Exim send it?
> Are there any advantages or disadvanteges in doing it either way?
You use fetchmail to get your mails. Exim to send your mails. see above.
--
Jan Michael C Alonzo http://dotdeb.150m.com
Debian Reference Project http://qref.sourceforge.net
MSDOS didn't get as bad as it is overnight -- it took over ten years
of careful development.
-- dmeggins@aix1.uottawa.ca
Attachment:
pgpwkAJvrah8Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature