On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 09:53:45PM +0200, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > I was wondering if there is any Kerberos support planned for mbsync? > > > no, but i'm open for patches. :)
Lol. > > Kerberos based authentication is a lot quicker than ssh tunnels, > > > about anything is. :} > > > and leads to far fewer locking issues with mailboxes! > > > huh? only because of the timing, i suppose? Not only! If you have two IMAP connections open, one of them gets "locked". For instance, when I have two copies of mutt running. Or if I have mutt running, and I run mbsync at the same time. But that I could deal with. The folks at Stanford math dept installed a new firewall, and "cleverly" made my email unusable. I authenticate with my IMAP server via an SSH tunnel. The IMAP server mounts all my mail folders via NFS, but spool file locally. With the new firewall in place, and now almost every time I get new mail when I'm online, my mailbox gets locked for 5 mins. Sadly the only other IMAP server I have access to doesn't let me authenticate via SSH. Kerberos is better anyway, but mbsync doesn't support it, ..., yet. GI -- "I am Homer of Borg. Prepare to be ...ooooh donuts!" ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ isync-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/isync-devel
