On Wed, 5 Sep 2007 16:52:56 -0400
"Bob Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> In case I haven't made myself clear, I despise Qmail with a passion. I
> suppose it is suitable for people who like puzzles (as in "What
> patches do I need to make this do something useful?" or "What
> third-party tool do I need to make sense out of these awful log
> files?") and who don't mind inflicting lots of unnecessary secondary
> spam on the rest of the world.  Yes, I know there are _supposed_ to be
> patches that fix that problem, but (a) the one I've seen in action
> doesn't work very well, and (b) you shouldn't need to apply
> third-party patches to your mail server to make it do what it is
> supposed to do in the first place.

I second all these points. I think it's probably better to use sendmail than
qmail. Sendmail at least supports most (all?) SMTP / antispam related features,
it is well documented , and configurable to the extreme (with the caveat that
its configuration may be a bit daunting to the un-initiated :D).

I just realised that qmail appears over and over in Linux distros, or at least
on linux servers i've had to suffer... not sure the relationship there (in
design / philosophy...)... and I am really NOT wanting to start a flame war.
Just a thought that crossed my mind as I was reading this thread.

{Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome

"It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent,
but the one most responsive to change." Charles Darwin.

I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery when wet.
Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You have been
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to