Hi, * Adam Funk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050928 16:29]: > On Wednesday 28 September 2005 14:23, Steve Lamb wrote: > > Why should I when the program has to handle failure anyway? The > > argument always seems to be "The MTA can handle failures." OK, and > > when the MTA fails what, the program sending mail is just supposed to > > route it to /dev/null? Even mutt, the current MUA de jour of the > > die-hard unixeistas has it's own primative queuing in place in case of > > MTA failure. > > Every MUA I've seen has an "outbox" where mail sits until it can be SMTP'd > away. Is that what you mean by primitive queueing?
I can't remember that mutt has such an feature. Also programs like mail usually don't have that, but just give back an error ... Cheers, Andi -- ## 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/
