I've been using sylpheed-claws for email for sometime, great prog, however,
since I'm not in the GUI very often I'm going to setup mutt....make my life
easier, hopefully. At any rate, just so I have the process down.....

I'll use fetchmail to pick up mail from a half dozen mail boxes, then feed
it to procmail to filter and deliver to the individual mail boxes, mutt to
read and compose and ssmtp to send out the email.....this is the correct
process...right???

Using slack 9.1 and ssmtp from compiled source.

Any downside to using ssmtp??? Sendmail seems like overkill for my personal
machine.

ken

No_One wrote:

> Any downside to using ssmtp??? Sendmail seems like overkill for my
> personal machine.

It probably is, given your description. However, if you could configure
mutt to send messages through your service provider's SMTP server,
you could leave out ssmtp as well.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sylvain Robitaille syl@alcor.concordia.ca

Systems analyst / Postmaster Concordia University
Instructional & Information Technology Montreal, Quebec, Canada
----------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 05:24:23 +0000 (UTC),
Sylvain Robitaille <syl@alcor.concordia.ca> wrote:
>
> However, if you could configure
> mutt to send messages through your service provider's SMTP server,
> you could leave out ssmtp as well.

AFAIK, mutt generally requires a local MTA, following the traditional
UNIX idiom of "Each program does one thing well".

This is supposed to be a feature, not a bug.

--
Mark Hill

On 2005-09-21, Mark Hill <m@rk.invalid> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 05:24:23 +0000 (UTC),
> Sylvain Robitaille <syl@alcor.concordia.ca> wrote:
>>
>> However, if you could configure
>> mutt to send messages through your service provider's SMTP server,
>> you could leave out ssmtp as well.
>
> AFAIK, mutt generally requires a local MTA, following the traditional
> UNIX idiom of "Each program does one thing well".
>
> This is supposed to be a feature, not a bug.
>

FWIW and assuming that I understand the page correctly, Mutt 1.5.10
develop. ver has POP and IMAP support.

ken

On 2005-09-21, Sylvain Robitaille <syl@alcor.concordia.ca> wrote:
> No_One wrote:
>
>> Any downside to using ssmtp??? Sendmail seems like overkill for my
>> personal machine.
>
> It probably is, given your description. However, if you could configure
> mutt to send messages through your service provider's SMTP server,
> you could leave out ssmtp as well.
>

Thank for the input, I'll follow up on the suggestion this evening.

ken

I wrote:

>> ... if you could configure mutt to send messages through your service
>> provider's SMTP server, you could leave out ssmtp as well.

No_One followed up:

> Thank for the input, I'll follow up on the suggestion this evening.

Someone pointed out that Mutt will not be able to speak to the ISP's
SMTP server. I've checked the documentation on the web site, and this
is confirmed by the following, from http://wiki.mutt.org/?MuttGuide/Send

Mutt, by itself, cannot send mail. ... To the more technically
inclined, mutt does not speak SMTP. But that is where the MSA comes in.

You'll still need sSMTP, or one of the packages recommended on that same
web page, I'm afraid. I've used sSMTP here, and found it to be quite
reasonably sane and very simple to setup.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sylvain Robitaille syl@alcor.concordia.ca

Systems analyst Concordia University
Instructional & Information Technology Montreal, Quebec, Canada
----------------------------------------------------------------------

On 2005-09-21, No_One <no_one@no_where.com> wrote:
> On 2005-09-21, Mark Hill <m@rk.invalid> wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 05:24:23 +0000 (UTC),
>> Sylvain Robitaille <syl@alcor.concordia.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>> However, if you could configure
>>> mutt to send messages through your service provider's SMTP server,
>>> you could leave out ssmtp as well.
>>
>> AFAIK, mutt generally requires a local MTA, following the traditional
>> UNIX idiom of "Each program does one thing well".
>>
>> This is supposed to be a feature, not a bug.
>>
>
> FWIW and assuming that I understand the page correctly, Mutt 1.5.10
> develop. ver has POP and IMAP support.

mutt needs POP and IMAP to *read* mail. It doesn't need them to *send*
mail. Mark's point is that mutt relies on another program to do its
mail sending. So mutt requires an MTA to talk SMTP, but not POP or
IMAP.

--keith

Just a quick note to thank eveyone for their input...had trouble with
fetchmail and ssmtp...got fetchmail working using sendmail for the time being.

Again, thanks.......

ken