Re: Pine 4.2

[Allix Primus <alleve idirect com>]

Thanks for all your help, i'll look into those websites. The reason I don't want
to use netscape is because I want to do everything in the console (mainly
as a learning experience). That was why I wanted to get into the mail stuff. 
Thanks again.

On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, rlarson monmouth com wrote:
> Pine does not handle the SMTP and POP connections by itself. You need
> to set up a mail transfer agent like sendmail and a POP program like
> fetchmail in order to use Pine. Fetchmail is very easy to set up,
> however sendmail is a demon straight from the ninth level of hell. Once
> you get these two programs going there is nothing to using pine or elm.
> 
> I think that the easiest way to set up sendmail may be from Linuxconf
> however I have not been able to find documentation that allowed me to do
> this succesfully.
> 
> When I first started using Linux I found the sendmail address rewriting
> How-To to be the most helpful document on the topic. However when I
> upgraded to Red Hat 6.1 I found that my sendmail.cf based on this
> How-To no longer works. Maybe you will have better luck.
> 
> http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/docs/HOWTO/mini/Sendmail-Address-Rewrite
> 
> In order to get up and running again I used information from the
> following web site to get me up and running. Note that this is not
> perfect either, but it did work for me after a little hacking. YMMV.
> 
> http://www.moongroup.com/how-to.phtml
> 
> If your mail needs are not too heavy you can use the
> Netscape-Communicator mail facility which handles POP and SMTP by
> iteslf. Ultimately though the use of sendmail, procmail and fetchmail
> is far more powerful than Netscape-Communicator or any other
> similar all-in-one setup.
> 
> Theoretically the sendmail book from Oreilly will let you take full
> advantage of the capabilities of this software, however I found that
> the amount of time needed to fully understand this tome was beyond what
> I could justify.
> 
> Some people recommend alternatives to sendmail such as qmail and smail.
> I haven't looked at them, but I feel pretty secure in saying that they
> must be simpler to use.
> 
> Don't think that I am dissing sendmail. It is a very powerful program.
> However it is the one piece of software in RedHat  that I have found to
> be the most difficult to get to do what I want it to do when I want it
> to do it.