Eric, I need your help LOL [Mod: K9 setup]

[woody]

I got K9 running and retrieving my mail from the server, what do I need to change on my barca/poco account settings to get that mail from k9? Im lost unfortunately.

Thanks

[Eric]

Hi Woody,

I've moved your post here, it's more appropriate.

For K9 you can find the setup procedure here.

You need to change your incoming port to 9999
Incoming server: 127.0.0.1 or localhost
Username: your.isp.com/110/username

It's been a while since I used it, but this should work.
In case it doesn't, I'm sure others will be happy to help you with it.
There are other K9 users here on the forum, which I'm not anymore.

Good luck with it.

[woody]

worked like a champ, thanks eric

[Eric]

You're welcome Woody.
Hope K9 will do the job for you.
Have a great weekend.

[stone76567]

hi to all..
thanks for sharing your opinion and suggestion in this site..
btw im new here and i want to be a member of this site..
please accept me..
thanks a lot and God Bless..

[FFF]

You're welcome Woody.
Hope K9 will do the job for you.
Have a great weekend.

pmfji, and just for the record: K9 works for me since, i think, 2001- and the hit quote is stable for the last 8 years at 98,82%.

I especially like the absolute minimal number of "false whites", this happens almost never, maybe once in 6 months.

Karl

[Bones]

K9 works for me since, i think, 2001- and the hit quote is stable for the last 8 years at 98,82%.

I especially like the absolute minimal number of "false whites", this happens almost never, maybe once in 6 months.

Just curious but how would you compare the accuracy of K9 to the built in junk filter of Pocomail?

[FFF]

Well, as i use K9 longer than PM i can't compare, as i never bothered to try the inbuilt one, sorry.
Oh, if finally Slaven would announce an upgrade which correctly handled UTF-8 mails, that's the only grugde i have with PM...

[Tomas]

I used K9 many years ago, IIRC it was probably better than Pocomail's filters (but it could have been that I have used it before Pocomail had the Bayes filtering...not sure). Since many years ago I use SpamBayes and very happy (same as above, no false positives whatsoever for me with spambayes, that alone is a big timesaver, I don't care about detection rates that much as no false positives are more important given the amount of spam I get). So I think I can recommend both.