pine

[Chris G]

On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 11:02:24AM -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, Res wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 24 Jul 2009, Robert Holtzman wrote:
> >
> >> I too have been using Pine/Alpine for years. Be aware that development
> >> of Alpine has been abandoned by UW and the devel team has been "let go".
> >
> > True, but I never had any problems with even the original pine (which I
> > still have installed on my slackware and redhat boxes) so its not a
> > stresser if development has ceased, it's like a few other things I use
> > that have not been worked on in years, alpine is not 0.00000001% as
> > exploitable as GUI browsers, and stable, the only thing I never liked
> > about it was the delay in ticks before checking for a break in nntp, but
> > been used to that for close on two decades now so i just go make a coffee :)
> 
> You're right about Pine not having problems. I ran an older version for 
> years with no problems and never upgraded to a later version. I'm 
> running Alpine on the new box and it's at least as good.
> 
> Bug/security fixes, being patches, have to be applied, recompiled, and 
> in my case, .deb packages created because I want to use the package 
> manager to keep track of things. Also, to me, the one drawback to 
> Pine/Alpine was the lack of encryption support. yes, I know there are 
> several scripts to enable encryption use but I've tried almost all I 
> could find with little or no success.
> 
If you want something 'modern' along the same lines there's always
mutt which (supposedly) grew out of a mixture of pine and elm.  It's
still being very actively developed and is an excellent mail client.

-- 
Chris Green