On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 20:48:42 -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote: >On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 03:48:14PM -0700, Darren Spruell wrote: >> On Dec 2, 2007 2:21 PM, Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 12:56:11PM -0700, Anthony Roberts wrote: >> > > > I have seen several installations of Postfix go catatonic due to spam >> > > > overload, large messages, mailing list expansions, and other >> > > > undiagnosed >> > > > problems. These were run by Postfix lovers, so I have always assumed >> > > > that the installation was correct. In the one case I saw tested >> > > > replacing Postfix with Sendmail resulted in no further problems. >> > > >> > > I have seen equally catastrophic failures of Qmail. >> > > >> > > Trying to do mail right for everyone in base is an exercise in futility. >> > > >> > >> > Does base require an MTA? If so, is there a tiny-drive-footprint >> > local-only no-config MTA that could be in base? Everything else as a >> > pre-compiled package or in alternate install sets? >> >> Why is everyone trying to come up with a solution to a problem that >> doesn't exist? > >The 'problem' is a piece of software installed on the box that some of >us don't use. It takes up space (how much?). Each MTA has its >champions and its detractors. The Solomonesque solution would be to >remove the MTA from base altogether unless things in base need an MTA >for local delivery, in which case installing something smaller than >sendmail that can't be used for anything other than local delivery would >be one solution to the 'problem'. That's all I'm suggesting. >
Forget it. No, I'm not ordering you to. It's a tip. Given that the developers are ignoring this thread, my guess is that nothing is going to happen. It's all been said before. Yes things in base do use mail, and it is not enough to have something that can only do local delivery. I have a bunch of machines (firewalls mostly) that report daily, weekly and monthly with an insecurity report as well, anytime something critical changes. They are anywhere in the world. Local delivery is not an option. As to saving space: RTFA, it has been done to death. You can customise your own install if you need ^W want a smaller install. Just remember what nick@ says (You break it, you get to keep all the pieces) and you'll get no help sorting out your self-inflicted pain. Just as a hint as to how much we need a trimmed install: I install firewalls using CF instead of HDDs. The only sets I decline at install time are x*,g* and comp. The latter is NOT for security but because we do upgrades/updates by supplying a new fast swapped card instead of bugging a low powered CPU with insufficient RAM or HDD to hold and compile the source tree. I don't have even one of them where I have bothered to remove anything, even stuff that doesn't break things if it's not there. httpd isn't running, port 80 isn't open, big deal to save a few bits of CF that we have no shortage of space in. Why bother? It all fitted in 256MB but I can buy faster 1GB cards for a couple of dollars more than I paid for the old 256, so less reason to twiddle. But as I said, you can do it if you want. So why campaign for somebody else to do it for you? BTW I run or admin several mailservers. I don't use sendmail but I avoid campaigning for a change in base: The package I use installs in a minute and Just Works (TM) so no, I don't demand the replacement of sendmail by my favourite MTA. Sorry to have posted at all in this "going nowhere" thread but once it got off religious choices and descended back to space saving, I couldn't resist. It's time the thread died. It should have died on day 1. Rod/ /earth: write failed, file system is full cp: /earth/creatures: No space left on device
