From owner-freebsd-ports Tue May 30 16: 8: 8 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48F4337B5FE; Tue, 30 May 2000 16:08:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id QAA53417; Tue, 30 May 2000 16:08:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: kris owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 16:08:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway To: Dan Langille Cc: Will Andrews , ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: where did mail/qpopper3 come from? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 31 May 2000, Dan Langille wrote: > OK. That tells me what it is. I suspect the answer to my question is no. > > Then why do we have both popper and popper3? Because some people may want to stay with the old version, which given that qualcomm have a horrendous reputation for not being able to release a product which is not riddled with security holes, might be a smart idea. Qpopper 2.x has been patched to buggery over the past few years, so it's probably somewhere closer to "safe" by now :-) Of course, Qualcomm might well have done a turnaround and taken up beating their coders with a large prickly stick each time they add an unsafe string handling operation, but only time will tell. Kris ---- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message