Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Apr 1999, Chris Green wrote:
>
> > How is he to know that what he's replacing is "a fundamental piece of
> > your computing infrastructure"? Not everyone knows that sendmail is
> > part of the guts of the system but that mailx (for example) isn't?
> >
> > Not everyone installing Unix/Linux nowadays is an OS guru.
>
> If they're playing the role of admin, they damn sure should be. It's
> obvious from the beginning that they're not installing windoze 95.
>
As a 4-month old linux user (and passionnated), I've chosen
qmail over sendmail. I took time to read the docs of both, and
have done my best to be a not to bad admin with qmail.
Installing qmail as a replacement to sendmail didn't seem
difficult to me: the INSTALL* files are very straight-forward.
Reading the FAQ makes many usual admin things easy too.
But I must admit things have become impossible to me when
it has come to understanding qmail related tcp packages' mans.
My qmail runs as a tcpserver, but please ask no more to me ;-)
Anyway, sendmail's doc is very hard for a beginner to understand.
Its best point is being very complete. I really appreciate
qmail's coders' job, and understand easily they prefer writing
code to writing doc. Well, the mailing-list archives are not to
be despited when you have to solve what seems a common problem.
Fabrice
--
"A l'encontre de ce que pourraient penser d'aucuns quidams
mal renseignes un contestataire est un homme en colere qui
conteste, et non un idiot en fureur qui fait son testament."
-- Pierre Dac
