Branches
Releases
|
Version
|
Focus
|
Date
|
|
4.8.1
|
Minor bugfixes |
26-Mar-2008 10:44 |
|
4.8.0
|
Minor bugfixes |
19-Feb-2008 14:10 |
|
4.7.8
|
Minor bugfixes |
05-Feb-2008 10:19 |
|
4.7.7
|
Minor bugfixes |
08-Nov-2007 11:23 |
|
4.7.6
|
Minor bugfixes |
08-Aug-2007 10:15 |
|
4.7.5
|
Minor feature enhancements |
06-Jun-2007 10:24 |
|
4.7.4
|
Minor feature enhancements |
24-Apr-2007 13:51 |
|
4.7.3
|
Minor bugfixes |
18-Mar-2007 13:34 |
|
4.7.2
|
Minor feature enhancements |
20-Feb-2007 22:37 |
|
4.7.1
|
Minor feature enhancements |
02-Feb-2007 11:49 |
Articles referencing this project
Comments
[»]
Thanks!
by Jean-Michel Grimaldi - Oct 3rd 2007 14:28:31
I have been using fetchmail on IMAP/SSL for 6 years, and noticed that
messages occasionnaly disappeared. It did not bother me that much until
tonight when it dropped an important email. After googling for a few
minutes I found out fetchmail simply discards emails with headers not
compliant with RFC 822. getmail does not. getmail is great. Setup takes 2
minutes. Thanks for getmail!
[reply]
[top]
[»]
good work
by Adrian Thurston - Apr 12th 2006 09:21:04
Here's yet another reason to use getmail: for some silly reason fetchmail
will not allow you to concurrently retrieve mail from different servers
even though by default it just opens a socket connection to port 25 for
delivery. Exactly what is being guarded against?
And aside from all the fetchmail bashing: nice work.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
getmail as a daemon for maildrop
by reanjr - Jun 22nd 2005 11:26:46
Note: fetchmail is crap
I needed to set up an internal IMAP server for multiple users so I wrote
the following script to be run as root (I set it up to run from init.d,
where it imported the interval and redirected output to a log file, but
this isn't necessary).
In case someone finds it useful
#! /bin/bash
while :
do
for i in `ls /home/`;do
if [ -e /home/$i/.getmail ]; then
su $i -c getmail
fi
done
sleep $1
done
Call it as root, passing a parameter specifying the number of seconds
between checking email.
Then just set up a getmailrc file for any user that wants to use it.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Thanks!
by andrew cooke / jara software - Mar 24th 2003 16:22:05
I used to use fetchmail but had problems with both large messages and
"incorrect" headers. And when fetchmail has a problem with one message it
doesn't seem to get any other mail either.
It's possible that the large mesage problem was a configuration issue
(although I read the docs and believe I configured correctly), but I
understand that fetchmail is "famous" for not working if there are
inconsistencies in the header.
With getmail I no longer have problems - it works with large messages
(dbase backups) and, apparently, broken headers (one mailing list was
unusable 'til I installed getmail). I no longer have to fire up some
other POP client to clear out my mailbox every other week.
My mail config is documented in
case it's any use to anyone.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Simple, easy to use
by Tobtoh - Mar 23rd 2001 07:18:53
I must say this was a very easy program to install - it does exactly what I
want it to do (ie suck email via POP and store it on my server) and that's
it. Highly recommended!
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Ease of Use
by Christopher Maahs - Feb 24th 2000 13:12:39
I must admit that the ease of use of getmail over fetchmail keeps me using
getmail. Initial setup takes a few minutes.
Thanks for sharing your code with the rest of us.
~cj
[reply]
[top]
[»]
re: Bloatware, and why bother?
by Charles Cazabon - Jan 22nd 2000 17:36:43
Disclaimer: I'm the author of 'getmail'.
A lot of people don't like 'fetchmail' -- that's why I wrote getmail.
It's all of 30k of Python code, works well, doesn't do SMTP re-injection or
any header re-writing (which a lot of people prefer, because of the way
sendmail can obliterate useful information while re-writing headers), etc.
In addition, I think getmail is easier to configure and use than
fetchmail.
Bottom line: you're entitled to your opinion. If you prefer
'fetchmail', then by all means use it. I wrote getmail for my own
reasons, and you're free to use it or not. If you'd like something added
to getmail or changed, feel free to suggest it to me in email at
getmail@discworld.dyndns.org.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
getmail
by Chris Armstrong - Jan 16th 2000 22:37:10
Fetchmail is bloatware, and not all people want to run a SMTP daemon.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: getmail
by Stefan Scholl - Feb 6th 2001 03:38:38
> Fetchmail is bloatware, and not all
> people want to run a SMTP daemon.
You don't have to run a SMTP daemon with
fetchmail. You can configure it
to pass the mails to a specified program.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: getmail
by Ed Avis - Sep 27th 2001 05:50:51
> You don't have to run a SMTP daemon
> with fetchmail. You can configure it
> to pass the mails to a specified program.
Could you explain how to do that? I can't see it from reading the
fetchmail manual page. I've heard rumours that fetchmail does have the
ability to just write messages to an mbox file or to stdout, but that this
is deliberately obfuscated in the documentation.
--
Ed Avis
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: getmail
by Charles Cazabon - Sep 27th 2001 10:21:04
>
> Could you explain how to do that? I
> can't see it from reading the fetchmail
> manual page.
You realize, of course, that this page is about getmail and not fetchmail?
Please take your question to the fetchmail mailing list.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: getmail
by Stefan Scholl - Sep 29th 2001 05:05:02
> % You don't have to run a SMTP daemon
> % with fetchmail. You can configure it
> % to pass the mails to a specified program.
> Could you explain how to do that? I
> can't see it from reading the fetchmail
> manual page.
mda "/usr/sbin/sendmail -oem -f %F %T"
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Why bother
by Alex Harford - Jan 11th 2000 22:51:32
My question is... why bother writing this? fetchmail works just as well,
and has more features.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Why bother
by Sebastian Dehne - Jun 10th 2001 08:28:04
> My question is... why bother writing
> this? fetchmail works just as well, and
> has more features.
Well.. I'm working on a Machine wehre fetchmail doesn't compile!!! So, I'm
really happy that getmail exist!!!
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Why bother
by RasJani - Jun 21st 2001 19:16:41
> fetchmail works just as well, and
> has more features.
Well, might be so that fetchmail has more features but still it aint doing
all the jobs its supposed to do. atleast well. Why i chose getmail over
fetchmail (i used to run fetchmail for over 2 years and in that time, i
really really couldnt get the results that i really needed) is the ability
to handle multidrop mail WELL and i do mean really well. In that
era where getmail really shines is ability to check multiple headers to
check receiver where as fetchmail can do that only for one line.
Fetchmail worked well, until i decided to pull some mailing list and stuff
like that where receiver is not really in the To: field but in getmail, i
can do regular expression check, who's the receiver in multiple headers
and then just copy the stuff directly into the mbox file. Imho, this is
much more than what fetchmail can offer to me at this time.
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Why bother
by be - Oct 19th 2001 23:27:19
hmm, well the problem (on my mandrake 8 system anyway) was
i had getmail running as root, which caused sendmail to spit the dummy.
creating a cron job as another user & "presto" it works like a charm.
frankly i'm impressed, i've been months mucking about with exim qmail
catchall fetchmail trestlemail
forwardmail and every other mail program i could find on freshmeat, none
of which would successfully download mail from my alldomains ".nu" mailbox
at my local isp and then redirect those messages to alternate public mail
addresses for family & friends.
thanks for your help Charles
cheers
bruce
[reply]
[top]
[»]
Re: Why bother
by Phil Jones - Nov 20th 2001 13:31:38
Multidrop retrieval with fetchmail? I have tried it with Postfix on Red Hat
7.2 but fetchmail seems to have bugs. The best I can manage is either 1)
deliver all mail to postmaster or 2) deliver ALL mail to BOTH my local
users. Argh. If it is bugs well maybe they can be fixed but I am exhausted
and out of patience with it. Getmail looks much better to me so far...
[reply]
[top]
|
