From: Terry Gray <g...@cac.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: pine 4.10
Date: 1999/09/24
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.20.9909240930560.-360221@tegdell-ndc>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 529108367
References: <7sbb7g$l1h$1@unlnews.unl.edu> <7sbc61$lbe$1@unlnews.unl.edu> <Pine.MNT.4.10.9909231720040.151-100000@rakastaja> <slrn7umdi4.a7.pk@dat95pkn.campus.mdh.se> <Pine.MNT.4.10.9909241454230.130-100000@rakastaja>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-X-Sender: g...@shivams.cac.washington.edu
X-Complaints-To: help@cac.washington.edu
X-Trace: nntp6.u.washington.edu 938190755 23316 (None) 140.142.17.37
Organization: University of Washington;  Computing & Communications
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.mail.pine

You can append :143 to the host name in order to bypass rsh/ssh on a
per-host basis.  (I believe this is mentioned in the tech notes, but I
could be wrong.)

-teg

On Fri, 24 Sep 1999, Martin-Eric Racine wrote:

> On 24 Sep 1999, peter karlsson wrote:
> > >I never understood why would anyone even _need_ RSH to log into
> > >an IMAP server, in the first place.  It works fine without it.

> > Because I easily can use ssh instead, to provide encryption?
> 
> Which makes a whole lot more sense.
> 
> However, usage of RSH should be user-configurable, in the main setup
> menu, without requiring to hack the .pinerc by hand.  Anyhow, having
> it as a global setting poses problems and unnecessary timeouts, when
> some of the Incoming-folder hosts disable RSH, but others require it.