Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!

10.3: Build UW-IMAPD without hacks UNIX
I know there are several hints on using UW-IMAPD with Panther, but they all either talk about modifying NetInfo to reduce Panther's password security, or else have you compiling against custom PAM libraries. I found the following while searching for a better way, as I loathe any solution that requires a lot of modification of the system or package.

Please see this article by Michael Johnson. He has copyrighted it, so I won't cut/paste the whole thing here -- just go read the original. His article is well worth the read, and I suggest emailing him thanks if you find this helpful.
  • Currently 2.14 / 5
  You rated: 5 / 5 (7 votes cast)

10.3: Build UW-IMAPD without hacks | 3 comments | Create New Account
Click here to return to the '10.3: Build UW-IMAPD without hacks' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
10.3: Build UW-IMAPD without hacks
Authored by: savowood on Jan 20, '04 04:41:53PM

I'm the author of that document. Thanks for putting this up here. I had intended to do it, but couldn't find the time. I'm looking for other places to publish it, so if anyone out there has a site (O'Reilly's Mac Dev Center or something similar), let me know.

Also, the page has been updated to point to the Release Candidate version of imapd instead of the (now) bad link to the Developer version.


[ Reply to This | # ]
10.3: Build UW-IMAPD without hacks
Authored by: shaggy4 on Mar 22, '04 02:51:38PM

Okay I build IMAPD like the website says but how do I connect to the IMAP server. Everytime tries it asks my password and states that it is incorrect. How do I access the server to get my mail.


In times like these you have to ask yourself -
what would Scooby-Doo?


[ Reply to This | # ]
10.3: Build UW-IMAPD without hacks
Authored by: sjk on Mar 22, '04 09:04:07PM
Also see the (unacknowledged) feedback to Michael's document that I posted in this hint.

[ Reply to This | # ]