On Wednesday 28 September 2005 14:34, Steve Lamb wrote: > Marc Haber wrote: > > UNIX philosophy is "one job, one tool". Most utilities that can send > > mail for one-or-the-other reason depend on some > > /usr/(lib|sbin)/sendmail where they can dump their messages to, > > relying on it to actually deliver them. I'd call that an MTA. > > Yes, so it has been said. So let me reiterate, since when did that > trump robustness and error handling? That, too, is another tennant of > UNIX philosophy.
That tenet is respected in the Unix tradition by using distinct tools that have well-defined, debuggable interfaces between them (e.g. SMTP and sendmail's handling of stdin). > > Unfortunately, smart-host for a desktop needs rewriting capabilities. > > Since when? Without it, the batch job mail will be from and to [EMAIL PROTECTED], which is probably not the right address for receiving it or for replies and bounces. > > it doesn't. nullmailer is appropriate for systems where end system > > and smarthost are under the same control so that the smarthost can be > > configured to cater for nullmailers inadequacies. However, on a ISP > > smarthost setup, a fully featured MTA is needed on the end system. > > Since when? I see absolutely no need for it at all. I think a machine connected to an ISP particularly needs address rewriting, especially if the machine is on a NAT LAN with hostnames that aren't resolvable outside the LAN. -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
