From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Apr 18 13:38:45 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id NAA06823 for questions-outgoing; Thu, 18 Apr 1996 13:38:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ki.net (ki.net [205.150.102.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA06795 Thu, 18 Apr 1996 13:38:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freebsd.ki.net (root@freebsd.ki.net [205.150.102.51]) by ki.net (8.7.4/8.7.4) with ESMTP id QAA11983; Thu, 18 Apr 1996 16:38:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (scrappy@localhost) by freebsd.ki.net (8.7.5/8.7.5) with SMTP id QAA07326; Thu, 18 Apr 1996 16:38:36 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: freebsd.ki.net: scrappy owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 16:38:35 -0400 (EDT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: Gary Palmer cc: Nik Clayton , questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NFS and NIS between two 2.1-STABLE machines In-Reply-To: <1380.829858357@palmer.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, 18 Apr 1996, Gary Palmer wrote: > What if you don't like Pine? :-) Don't think MH understands IMAP. POP > is a much better supported protocol AFAIK. > Ah, touche :) Wonder if MH is going to support IMAP4? Of course all "new" protocols state it, but IMAP4 is supposed to be the "be all and end all" of mail protocols, merging POP and IMAP features into one spec... Marc G. Fournier scrappy@ki.net Systems Administrator @ ki.net scrappy@freebsd.org