Re: which MTA to choose for a simple client?
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 01:10:15PM +0000, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
> On Qua, 09 Out 2013, berenger.morel wrote:
> >So, I think I'll go for mutt
>
> No one mentioned the simplest way: mutt now supports sending via
> smtp directly: http://dev.mutt.org/trac/wiki/MuttFaq/Sendmail#HowdoIconfigureMutttousearemoteSMTPservertosendmail
>
> Since it also supports IMAP accounts (and apparently even POP3), if
> you already have an email service (such as your ISP's, or a service
> like Gmail), you can use mutt alone. Just point it to your IMAP/POP3
> server to read emails, and the SMTP server to send emails.
>
> In this respect, it works like any other mail client like Icedove,
> Evolution, etc.
Some key differences:
• if your SMTP host cannot be resolved at user-hits-send-time, mutt
reports "can't resolve …" and rejects you back to the send screen.
One must manually exit and save to postponed mail folder (no
Outbox or automatic retries).
• mutt/gnutls may complain about your SMTP server's SSL certificate
in some circumstances where most other mailers are OK (it doesn't
like smtpauth.ncl.ac.uk for some reason, perhaps chained certs,
perhaps I should go and frob some gnutls stuff somewhere and it's
my fault)
Reply to: