Re: Need to upgrade claws-mail on debian 7.1
On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 15:12:38 -0700
Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 19:44:40 +0000 Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 09:13:11 -0700
> > Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 04:47:50 +0000 "Blair, Charles E III"
> > > <c-blair@illinois.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I am using debian 7.11, which includes version
> > > > 3.8.1 of claws-mail. I have recently been having
> > > > problems with this, and have been advised that I
> > > > need to upgrade to 3.11.1. It didn't seem possible
> > > > to do this with aptitude, and I am hoping there is
> > > > some other painless way.
> > >
> > > You're SOL: Claws 3.11 isn't available for Wheezy. At least, not
> > > that I've been able to find.
> > >
> > > A couple years ago, I too started having problems with Claws. I
> > > could receive but couldn't send or reply. Later, I was unable to
> > > connect to my email providers at all. They had slowly changed
> > > their security protocols which Claws couldn't handle. I upgraded
> > > to 3.10 from Wheezy-Backports, but that didn't help. Had to be
> > > at least 3.11 which worked fine on my Jessie install running in
> > > VirtualBox. Even looked into compiling 3.11 from source. No go.
> > > Dependencies. Wheezy libraries and such were too old. And the
> > > newer libraries were not available for Wheezy. Some had systemd
> > > dependencies as well. Compile them? Nope. Dependencies were the
> > > killer. Even thought of adding the Jessie repos to get the
> > > libraries, but that wouldn't work. I'd have to upgrade too much
> > > of Wheezy, if it would work at all. And I was fearful of
> > > trashing my system. So, I switched to Sylpheed. Not as good as
> > > Claws, but it worked. Now, it's starting to have problems: Can't
> > > send attachments.
> > >
> > > The easiest solution if you want to use Claws is to upgrade to a
> > > newer version of Debian. Sorry.
> > >
> >
> > If the problems are indeed about connectivity, possibly the use of
> > specialist email connectivity software might help i.e. an MTA rather
> > than an MUA. I'd be willing to bet that exim4 would deal with any
> > connectivity problems, and unless it has been explicitly removed, it
> > is part of a default Debian installation and may even be running at
> > this very moment.
> >
> > OK, there's a bit of a learning curve, but it may be less traumatic
> > than upgrading the whole OS. It's a mainstream MTA, there is plenty
> > of help on the Net, and this application, an outgoing smarthost with
> > (presumably) authentication and/or TLS, isn't particularly exotic.
> > Here are some basics:
> > https://wiki.debian.org/Exim
> >
> > I'm using claws on sid with exim4 on wheezy as smarthost, and I'm
> > sending direct to the rest of the world without problems. I'm not
> > currently using any authenticated sending from exim4, but I have
> > done in the past.
>
> Well, the developer of Claws on his web site said the "problems" users
> were experiencing was in Claws itself and it had been fixed in 3.11.
> I don't know if it was a bug or something else. IIRC, the problem was
> caused by the implementation of new security protocols by email
> providers like Yahoo and GMail, among others, because of a major
> breach Yahoo had a couple years ago.
Yes, it's common for email client applications to talk to remote SMTP
servers, but the implementation of extra protocols is usually a game of
catch-up, when people start complaining about individual problems. The
primary job of an email client is to be an efficient interface between
the user and email.
A 'mail server', on the other hand, normally has a vast range of options
available long before email providers start using them. At any moment,
the 'mail servers', exim4, postfix, sendmail etc. will pretty much
always be more capable than the average client application. Their
primary job is to talk to other email servers.
Here we have a situation where upgrading the client application is
proving to be difficult, and I suggest that it *might* be easier to use
a 'mail server' as an outgoing smarthost.
--
Joe
Reply to: