Date: Fri, 03 Jul 1998 14:44:45 -0400 From: "Jean M. Vandette" <vandj@securenet.net> To: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: CUCIPOP? Message-ID: <199807031848.OAA23007@ms.securenet.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 04:08 AM 7/3/1998 -0500, you wrote: >On Thu, Jul 02, 1998 at 11:54:28AM -0700, W. Reilly Cooley, Esq. wrote: >> I've read a couple of messages in other lists recommending CUCIPOP in >> light of the recent exploits of QPOPPER. Has anyone tried this? What are >> you opinions? One thing obviously irritating about QPOPPER is the >> difficultly in transferring large attachments. > > Our problem with CUCIPOP was that it does not mark the messages as >"read" if you don't delete the messages. I understand that there are >good technical reasons for it, but we had a number of users that complained >due to privacy issues. Otherwise it is an excellent package. > > Tim > We started using CUCIPOP here in Feb98 on the recommendation it was given from Mike Smith (FreeBSD.ORG) and have had no problems. The messages are under the current port marked as read. The size of the deamon is about on quarter of QPOPPER, which makes it very fast and light. CUCIPOP handles the attachments with little problems usually when there has been a problem with an attachment it has been a very large file(15 - 20 MB or greater) that hangs somewhere for various reasons 95% of which rest between the chair and the keyboard (Impatience). I have no hesitations on recommending it as a alternative to QPOPPER. Regards John M. Vandette **John M. Vandette, Consultant vandj@securenet.net** **SecureNet Information Services Inc. Internet Providers** **100 Alexis Nihon Blvd #940 St. Laurent, Quebec, Canada** **"Who does BSD Unix....?" "We do Chucky... We do..."** To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199807031848.OAA23007>