It's my experience that Polipo provides for faster proxying than Privoxy (running both on a recent Ubuntu). However, Polipo is not uniformly stable on Windows. I use Privoxy with local Tor instances on Windows, but Polipo on Ubuntu.<div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 18:00, Jim McClanahan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jimmymac@copper.net">jimmymac@copper.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">Jan Reister wrote:<br>
><br>
> Il 28/09/2009 15:25, Eugen Leitl ha scritto:<br>
> > Why the switch to Polipo from Privoxy? Is Privoxy officially<br>
> > deprecated now?<br>
><br>
> I just found out today and am wondering myself. From hearsay, Polipo<br>
> should perform faster and better.<br>
<br>
</div>There was a somewhat extended discussion about Privoxy vs Polipo on this<br>
list not too long ago (a month or two?). You may wish to review that.<br>
My recollection of that discussion is that Polipo being better was<br>
called into question. Certainly Privoxy is alive and well. Besides<br>
plugging DNS leaks, the two programs serve somewhat different purposes.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">***********************************************************************<br>
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to <a href="mailto:majordomo@torproject.org">majordomo@torproject.org</a> with<br>
unsubscribe or-talk in the body. <a href="http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/" target="_blank">http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>