> > It might help if we used a bit more precision in terimonolgy. "Not a full
> > blown MTA" as described here is a Mail Submission Agent (MSA). See RFC
> > 5598 for details:
OpenSMTPD has quite recently been released for production and is rather
good and worth adding to the review list.
http:/
Le 17/06/2013 06:12, Bob Proulx a écrit :
> David Weinehall wrote:
>> Bjørn Mork wrote:
>>> The issue that worries me most about these desktop notification plans is
>>> the possibility that some package may decide to unnecessarily drop
>>> support for non-desktop systems, adding dependencies on the
David Weinehall wrote:
> Bjørn Mork wrote:
> > The issue that worries me most about these desktop notification plans is
> > the possibility that some package may decide to unnecessarily drop
> > support for non-desktop systems, adding dependencies on the desktop
> > notification system. I believe w
On 15/06/13 13:04, David Weinehall wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:15:03PM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> The issue that worries me most about these desktop notification plans is
>> the possibility that some package may decide to unnecessarily drop
>> support for non-desktop systems, adding depe
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:15:03PM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> The issue that worries me most about these desktop notification plans is
> the possibility that some package may decide to unnecessarily drop
> support for non-desktop systems, adding dependencies on the desktop
> notification system. I
On 30/05/13 12:15, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Ben Hutchings writes:
>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 09:06:59PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 05:11:35PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 29 mai 2013 à 16:31 +0200, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino a
écrit :
> Take for
On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 21:49:59 -0400, Chris Knadle
wrote:
>On Friday, June 14, 2013 02:31:45, Marc Haber wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:42:15 -0400, Chris Knadle
>> wrote:
>> >So right now I think that I probably just didn't know that this had been
>> >fixed, because I haven't been using the "spl
On 31/05/13 08:41, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> A utility to scan syslog and convey important information to the user
> would be much more useful than configuring all mailers in Debian to read
> root's local mail by default. I know how to redirect root's mail
> elsewhere, thank you for not makin
On Friday, June 14, 2013 02:31:45, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:42:15 -0400, Chris Knadle
>
> wrote:
> >So right now I think that I probably just didn't know that this had been
> >fixed, because I haven't been using the "split file" configuration for
> >along time. I clearly rememb
On 06/13/2013 04:03 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Daniel Pocock , 2013-06-12, 21:41:
>> #4: Our priorities are our users and free software
>
> In any Debian discussion, given enough time, someone inevitably mentions
> SC§4. Once this occurs, the thread is over, and the person who mentioned
> it has au
On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:42:15 -0400, Chris Knadle
wrote:
>So right now I think that I probably just didn't know that this had been
>fixed, because I haven't been using the "split file" configuration for along
>time. I clearly remember having _upgrade_ problems in 2003 with Exim on
>Debian Testi
On Thursday, June 13, 2013 08:16:02, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 07:25:34 -0400, Chris Knadle
>
> wrote:
> >On Thursday, June 13, 2013 06:41:16, Marc Haber wrote:
> >> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:17:11 +0100, Ian Campbell
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >> >I've just tried this on Wheezy and stuff wr
On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 07:25:34 -0400, Chris Knadle
wrote:
>On Thursday, June 13, 2013 06:41:16, Marc Haber wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:17:11 +0100, Ian Campbell
>>
>> wrote:
>> >I've just tried this on Wheezy and stuff written in
>> >
>> >in /etc/exim4/conf.d/acl/00-test.dpkg-dist didn't get
On 13/06/13 12:59, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 09:41:27PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> DFSG #4: Our priorities are our users and free software
>>
>> A court prosecuting/persecuting one of our users is not in scope
> I'm now struggling to understand which side of the argument
On Thursday, June 13, 2013 06:41:16, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:17:11 +0100, Ian Campbell
>
> wrote:
> >I've just tried this on Wheezy and stuff written in
> >
> >in /etc/exim4/conf.d/acl/00-test.dpkg-dist didn't get included:
> >$ sudo update-exim4.conf --verbose
> >
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 09:41:27PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> DFSG #4: Our priorities are our users and free software
>
> A court prosecuting/persecuting one of our users is not in scope
I'm now struggling to understand which side of the argument you are arguing.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:17:11 +0100, Ian Campbell
wrote:
>I've just tried this on Wheezy and stuff written in
>in /etc/exim4/conf.d/acl/00-test.dpkg-dist didn't get included:
>$ sudo update-exim4.conf --verbose
>using split configuration scheme from /etc/exim4/conf.d
>inter
no MTA at all
> - (did I miss or forget something?)
> * popularity is irrelevant (the default MTA will always be much more
> popular) the entire section will be removed
> * advanced use cases are irrelevant, since the admin of such a
> system will install what she needs any
On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 23:50 -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> One snag I ran into concerning the abstraction layer concerned customizing
> the
> "split file" configuration via conf.d/ files. Upon upgrades dpkg recongizes
> the changes in configuration files and prompts the user; choosing not to
> r
On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 16:04:06, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On 12-06-13 16:59, Marc Haber wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:38:28 +0100, Jonathan Dowland
> >
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 08:00:17AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> >>> To this exim expert, configuring exim is done as
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:04:06 +0200, Wouter Verhelst
wrote:
>Yes, me too. It only works for me because I know exim pretty well, and
>then the single-file approach is more transparent than any approach
>involving generated files.
Exim's abstraction layer uses a single file as well (by default),
whi
* Daniel Pocock , 2013-06-12, 21:41:
#4: Our priorities are our users and free software
In any Debian discussion, given enough time, someone inevitably mentions
SC§4. Once this occurs, the thread is over, and the person who mentioned
it has automatically lost the argument.
--
Jakub Wilk
-
On 12-06-13 16:59, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:38:28 +0100, Jonathan Dowland
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 08:00:17AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>>> To this exim expert, configuring exim is done as follows:
>>>
>>> zcat /usr/share/doc/exim4/examples/example.conf.gz > /etc/e
On 12/06/13 14:41, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 08:08:17AM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> OpenPGP and S/MIME don't guarantee anonymity as they don't (and can't
>> really) encrypt the headers/envelope
>
> Erm, they also identify the recipients, as it's the recipients key to w
On 2013-06-12 08:08:17 +0200 (+0200), Daniel Pocock wrote:
> On 12/06/13 00:02, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> > That basically just makes the case for relying on (E)SMTP only for
> > transporting messages, but leveraging OpenPGP or S/MIME to provide
> > authentication and confidentiality where required (
e
>>
>> That is the type of `metadata' that allows a hostile party to
>> start building a social graph of who knows who. Even if they
>> can't see the contents of the communications, those social graphs
>> are undesirable and an ideal solution would pr
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:38:28 +0100, Jonathan Dowland
wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 08:00:17AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> To this exim expert, configuring exim is done as follows:
>>
>> zcat /usr/share/doc/exim4/examples/example.conf.gz > /etc/exim4/exim4.conf
>
>Absolutely. At some point
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:39:28 +0100, Jonathan Dowland
wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:05:24PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
>> When I remember learning exim I found it quite nice that the config is quite
>> self-explaining what it is actually doing.
>
>The exim config — once I started to actual
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:50:01PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> Something that doesn't have these limitations:
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2487#section-7
>
> This is also relevant (not just for Postfix):
>
> http://www.postfix.org/TLS_README.html#client_tls_encrypt
>
> "Despite the poten
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 08:08:17AM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> OpenPGP and S/MIME don't guarantee anonymity as they don't (and can't
> really) encrypt the headers/envelope
Erm, they also identify the recipients, as it's the recipients key to which
the messages are encrypted. (and typically the s
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:05:24PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> The only class of users I can imagine the current situation not optional
> is someone being used to postfix[1].
Well, that's not me…
> When I remember learning exim I found it quite nice that the config is quite
> self-explaining
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 08:00:17AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> To this exim expert, configuring exim is done as follows:
>
> zcat /usr/share/doc/exim4/examples/example.conf.gz > /etc/exim4/exim4.conf
Absolutely. At some point in the last few years I was recommended this course
of action by a
't see the
> contents of the communications, those social graphs are undesirable and
> an ideal solution would prevent that.
>
Can I just check - have we really gone from a (far too long, IMO)
discussion on what default MTA we provide, to replacing SMTP?
Just so I know if it's worth killfiling the entire thread.
Neil
--
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On 12/06/13 00:02, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2013-06-11 23:50:01 +0200 (+0200), Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> Something that doesn't have these limitations:
>>
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2487#section-7
> [...]
>
> That basically just makes the case for relying on (E)SMTP only for
> transporting
On 11-06-13 18:37, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 12:45:07PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>> Sendmail has just one more layer of indirection by virtue of the m4
>> macros. Postfix has most of its behavior hard coded in the C sources,
>> while exim's behavior can be controlled by run-
On 2013-06-11 23:50:01 +0200 (+0200), Daniel Pocock wrote:
> Something that doesn't have these limitations:
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2487#section-7
[...]
That basically just makes the case for relying on (E)SMTP only for
transporting messages, but leveraging OpenPGP or S/MIME to provide
On 11/06/13 22:56, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2013-06-12 02:09:24 +0800 (+0800), Chow Loong Jin wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 08:01:58PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>>
>>> What about replacing SMTP?
>>
>> With what?
>
> With ESMTP, of course!
Something that doesn't have these limitations:
* Jonathan Dowland [130611 18:35]:
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 12:45:07PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> > Sendmail has just one more layer of indirection by virtue of the m4
> > macros. Postfix has most of its behavior hard coded in the C sources,
> > while exim's behavior can be controlled by run-time
On 2013-06-12 02:09:24 +0800 (+0800), Chow Loong Jin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 08:01:58PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> >
> > What about replacing SMTP?
>
> With what?
With ESMTP, of course!
--
{ PGP( 48F9961143495829 ); FINGER( fu...@cthulhu.yuggoth.org );
WWW( http://fungi.yuggoth.org/
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 08:01:58PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
>
> On 28/05/13 03:02, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > Now that we are done with systemd for the time being, can we have the
> > flame war about replacing Exim with Postfix as the default MTA?
> >
> &g
On 28/05/13 03:02, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Now that we are done with systemd for the time being, can we have the
> flame war about replacing Exim with Postfix as the default MTA?
>
> Are there any objections other than "but I like it this way!"?
>
What
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 12:45:07PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> Sendmail has just one more layer of indirection by virtue of the m4
> macros. Postfix has most of its behavior hard coded in the C sources,
> while exim's behavior can be controlled by run-time configuration if
> an advanced user wants t
On Ma, 28 mai 13, 03:02:22, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Now that we are done with systemd for the time being, can we have the
> flame war about replacing Exim with Postfix as the default MTA?
>
> Are there any objections other than "but I like it this way!"?
I just moved th
On Thu, 6 Jun 2013 20:06:56 -0400, Chris Knadle
wrote:
>On Thursday, June 06, 2013 16:30:48, Roger Lynn wrote:
>> The smarthosts run by ISPs that most people will be using by default have
>> to accept mail direct from MUAs such as Outlook and Thunderbird which will
>> often be unable to generate c
On Thu, 6 Jun 2013 14:07:38 +0100, Jonathan Dowland
wrote:
>On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:38:52PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 May 2013 16:53:56 +0200, m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
>> >I think that ease of configurability is a major plus for Postfix when
>> >compared to Exim, since
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 11:36:21PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Well, in that case, it failed to be as simple to configure as qmail.
Is ease of configuration an important criteria for default MTA? More
important than sensible-default?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-r
On Thursday, June 06, 2013 16:30:48, Roger Lynn wrote:
> On 06/06/13 14:00, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 05, 2013 15:35:14, Marc Haber wrote:
> >> On Sun, 2 Jun 2013 19:53:59 -0400, Chris Knadle
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >> >Attempting to use an FQDN is also troublesome, because Exim tries
On 06/06/13 14:00, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 05, 2013 15:35:14, Marc Haber wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Jun 2013 19:53:59 -0400, Chris Knadle
>> wrote:
>> >Attempting to use an FQDN is also troublesome, because Exim tries to use
>> >DNS to look up the FQDN, and falls back to using 'uname -n'
If you do discover how to do this reliably, I'd be interested in your solution.
If you/someone else feels it's too unrelated to this list, feel free to email
me directly, but I think this is generally interesting.
Ron Scott-Adams
r...@tohuw.net
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack
On Thursday, June 06, 2013 13:18:39, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Chris Knadle [130606 14:53]:
> > I'm glad you asked this, because it prompted me to investigate further.
> > This was something I was told was commonly done, but it looks now like
> > it might be a misnomer. I'm not able to find a
* Chris Knadle [130606 14:53]:
> I'm glad you asked this, because it prompted me to investigate further. This
> was something I was told was commonly done, but it looks now like it might be
> a misnomer. I'm not able to find a concrete example of a system that allows
> SMTP MTA transfers but
On 05/31/2013 12:27 AM, Philip Hands wrote:
> Well, I'd say that at least part of the motivation was actually to write
> a qmail replacement, that didn't have someone with DJB's atitute to
> licensing as upstream -- it was for a long time called vmailer
> (v==vapour) as coined by DJB, and adopted b
On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 02:07:38PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> You're right, in that the "interface" that a user has to exim-on-debian is
> update-exim4.conf.conf, rather than exim4's configuration directly; however,
> length aside, I don't see this as a strength, but a serious source of
> con
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:38:52PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 16:53:56 +0200, m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
> >I think that ease of configurability is a major plus for Postfix when
> >compared to Exim, since a common configurations is just a few lines long.
>
> How many
On Wednesday, June 05, 2013 15:35:14, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Jun 2013 19:53:59 -0400, Chris Knadle
>
> wrote:
> >On Sunday, June 02, 2013 17:10:02, Marc Haber wrote:
> >> Exim's default in the packages is not to send authentication data over
> >> a non-encrypted connection. The debconf cod
On Sun, 02 Jun 2013 14:26:31 -0700, Russ Allbery
wrote:
>Marc Haber writes:
>> Russ Allbery wrote:
>>> Marc Haber writes:
>
Certificates are usually only used in E-Mail when a server authenticates
itself to a client before the client sends its authentication data. SMTP
with clien
On Sun, 2 Jun 2013 19:53:59 -0400, Chris Knadle
wrote:
>On Sunday, June 02, 2013 17:10:02, Marc Haber wrote:
>> Exim's default in the packages is not to send authentication data over
>> a non-encrypted connection. The debconf code could try to check
>> whether the smarthost allowes TLS, and if not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Le 29/05/2013 21:52, Marc Haber a écrit :
> But, alas, people are going to report every single mail in the
> local mailbox als Spam to their ISP.
>
MUAs tend to present mail in "folders" by "accounts". They can be
configured to display local mail i
On Sunday, June 02, 2013 17:10:02, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 15:06:40 -0400, Chris Knadle
>
> wrote:
> >I can understand why one would want this, but I can also understand why it
> >hasn't been done. Without first setting up TLS, this would involve
> >passing a username/password ove
Marc Haber writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Marc Haber writes:
>>> Certificates are usually only used in E-Mail when a server authenticates
>>> itself to a client before the client sends its authentication data. SMTP
>>> with client certificates is possible, but I have only seen this two
>>> ti
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 12:16:11 -0700, Russ Allbery
wrote:
>Marc Haber writes:
>> Certificates are usually only used in E-Mail when a server authenticates
>> itself to a client before the client sends its authentication data. SMTP
>> with client certificates is possible, but I have only seen this tw
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 15:06:40 -0400, Chris Knadle
wrote:
>I can understand why one would want this, but I can also understand why it
>hasn't been done. Without first setting up TLS, this would involve passing a
>username/password over the 'net in the clear, which is something I try hard to
>neve
Le 31/05/2013 13:10, Marc Haber a écrit :
> On Fri, 31 May 2013 08:41:56 +0200, Jean-Christophe Dubacq
> wrote:
>> Le 30/05/2013 18:29, Marc Haber a écrit :
>>> On Thu, 30 May 2013 13:56:02 +0200, Olav Vitters
>>> wrote:
Seems the solutions are very focussed on the assumption that things
>>>
On Sat, 2013-06-01 at 15:06 -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Friday, May 31, 2013 07:15:36, Marc Haber wrote:
[...]
> > SMTP with client certificates is possible, but I
> > have only seen this two times in 15 years of running E-Mail servers.
>
> Yes I'd expect this to be rare, and I can't recall us
On 31/05/13 07:50, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> A utility to scan syslog and convey important information to the user
> would be much more useful than configuring all mailers in Debian to read
> root's local mail by default. I know how to redirect root's mail
> elsewhere, thank you for not makin
On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 20:02:42, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Chris Knadle writes:
> > On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 15:46:15, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> That's exactly the point, and is why I would prefer not to write those
> >> notifications into a file that no one ever looks at. (Which is why I
> >> d
On Saturday, June 01, 2013 05:34:22, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Russ Allbery
>
> > Basically, what we're looking for here is the equivalent of a check
> > engine light (except, of course, with better user-visible diagnostics
> > available). That's what the end user actually wants: something clear
Marc Haber writes:
> For e-mail coming in from other clients, with the local exim acting as
> a server?
> Certificates are usually only used in E-Mail when a server authenticates
> itself to a client before the client sends its authentication data. SMTP
> with client certificates is possible, bu
On Friday, May 31, 2013 07:15:36, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 19:51:04 -0400, Chris Knadle
>
> wrote:
> >For Exim, the one thing I would want to change would be to ship a
> >configuration that by default created an SSL certificate and enabled
> >MAIN_TLS_ENABLE to enable TLS SMTP tran
On 2013-05-28 13:05:25 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 28 mai 2013 à 12:13 +0200, Adam Borowski a écrit :
> > Being able to send outgoing mail, and to handle local (such as
> > SMTP rejects or notifications from system daemons) seems plenty
> > useful to me.
>
> Most clients (apart mayb
]] Russ Allbery
> Basically, what we're looking for here is the equivalent of a check engine
> light (except, of course, with better user-visible diagnostics available).
> That's what the end user actually wants: something clear and visible
> indicating that something is wrong, which they can dri
On Thu, 30 May 2013 19:51:04 -0400, Chris Knadle
wrote:
>For Exim, the one thing I would want to change would be to ship a
>configuration that by default created an SSL certificate and enabled
>MAIN_TLS_ENABLE to enable TLS SMTP transfers.
For e-mail coming in from other clients, with the local
On Fri, 31 May 2013 08:41:56 +0200, Jean-Christophe Dubacq
wrote:
>Le 30/05/2013 18:29, Marc Haber a écrit :
>> On Thu, 30 May 2013 13:56:02 +0200, Olav Vitters
>> wrote:
>>> Seems the solutions are very focussed on the assumption that things
>>> cannot be changed. E.g. programs currently send em
On Thu, 30 May 2013 20:25:12 -0400, Chris Knadle
wrote:
>It's somewhat depressing when I ask for the person's email address and their
>response is "I don't email", and they ask me for my Facebook ID and my
>response is "I don't use Facebook". It's a cultural divide that ends up
>causing an ele
On Thu, 30 May 2013 23:25:15 +0300, Christian PERRIER
wrote:
>MTA on average people's desktop machine are point less. Is there
>anyone who is *not* a Linux "geek" to deny this?
Non-Geeks are probably not aware that a system holds many packages of
software that expects to be able to deliver status
Jean-Christophe Dubacq writes:
> And in my experience, email tends to be much more fragile than dbus.
The warm fuzzy feeling you get when you don't know there is a
problem...
> How many times have I suddenly looked
> at the queue of a computer that has been mis-configured and that
> accumulate
Le 30/05/2013 18:29, Marc Haber a écrit :
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 13:56:02 +0200, Olav Vitters
> wrote:
>> Seems the solutions are very focussed on the assumption that things
>> cannot be changed. E.g. programs currently send email, so email it has
>> to be forever.
>
> It is not a good idea to dro
On Thursday, May 30, 2013 16:25:15, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Thomas Goirand (z...@debian.org):
> > 1/ Your parents don't read mail? That is surprising to me. In this days
> > and age, everyone does.
Unfortunately I'm finding that the above is not always the case. I'm
increasingly runni
war about replacing Exim with Postfix as the default MTA?
> >> >
> >> > Are there any objections other than "but I like it this way!"?
> >
> > What are the reasons to make the switch? (I think it's more important to
> > hear the "pro&
On Thu, 30 May 2013 19:45:48 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
wrote:
>Maybe is related to cPannel. Seems that cPannel 11.30 shipped Exim 4.69
>and 11.32 Exim 4.77 [2]
Judging from the sheer amount of clueless cpanel users showing up on
exim lists, this is a really big possibilty.
Greetings
Marc
Quoting Thomas Goirand (z...@debian.org):
> 1/ Your parents don't read mail? That is surprising to me. In this days
> and age, everyone does.
Yes.
Out of 5 adult people in my family, all of them read their mail daily.
4 of them do it through a web interface and have absolutely no use of
a mail
On 29/05/13 08:18, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Monday, May 27, 2013 21:02:22, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> > Now that we are done with systemd for the time being, can we have the
>> > flame war about replacing Exim with Postfix as the default MTA?
>> >
>> > Are
nadle wrote:
>>>>> - Exim is more popular
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.201201/mxsurvey.html
>>>>
>>>> This is actually quite interesting.
>>>>
>>>> Given that
On Thu, 30 May 2013 16:42:28 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer
wrote:
>Agreed,... but that also somehow indicates to me, that this would be the
>more appropriate default MTA.
>It will do quite securely what most people need, especially those end
>user who have no clue about running ma
On Thu, 30 May 2013 16:53:56 +0200, m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
>I think that ease of configurability is a major plus for Postfix when
>compared to Exim, since a common configurations is just a few lines long.
How many lines does an average update-exim4.conf.conf have?
Greetings
Marc
--
Marco d'Itri writes:
> On May 30, Chris Knadle wrote:
>
>> There's a reason it feels like this. Postfix was designed with security in
>> mind, but wasn't focused on being a general purpose MTA.
> Says who? Because I was around at the time, and I remember pretty well
> that the goal was to wri
On Thu, 30 May 2013 13:56:02 +0200, Olav Vitters
wrote:
>Seems the solutions are very focussed on the assumption that things
>cannot be changed. E.g. programs currently send email, so email it has
>to be forever.
It is not a good idea to drop the way that > 90 % of programs use to
deliver message
On Thu, 30 May 2013 13:31:14 +0200, Wouter Verhelst
wrote:
>On 30-05-13 12:27, Marc Haber wrote:
>> We should make local mail or other messages trivially and
>> automatically visible for people who have installed Debian in NNF[1]
>> compliant way, but if one has gone to length to use something
>>
Marc Haber writes:
> Chris Knadle wrote:
>> I don't like the fact that the /etc/exim4/passwd.client file is in a
>> plaintext format, but there are usually several such files on systems
>> such that realistically we're only really "safe" as long as the
>> machines we run haven't been broken into
On May 30, Chris Knadle wrote:
> There's a reason it feels like this. Postfix was designed with security in
> mind, but wasn't focused on being a general purpose MTA.
Says who? Because I was around at the time, and I remember pretty well
that the goal was to write a sendmail replacement.
And a
>http://shearer.org/MTA_Comparison#Postfix
Agreed,... but that also somehow indicates to me, that this would be the
more appropriate default MTA.
It will do quite securely what most people need, especially those end
user who have no clue about running mailservers at all.
If an expert admin
* Marc Haber [130530 12:39]:
> While I don't consider postfix as bad as you describe, I tend to
> describe Postfix as the menu in a better restaurant: A relatively
> small number of sophisticated dishes which you can choose from, and
> if you like them, you will be perfectly satisfied. If you wan
Marc Haber writes:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 06:46:46 -0400, Scott Kitterman
> wrote:
>>Even if they are using a system
>>that allows them to go back and review their notification history when they
>>return to their system,
>
> It just occurred to me that you are describing a mail client.
Let's ad
On 30-05-13 13:56, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 01:31:14PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> If we're making something GNOME-specific, we don't do that. If we make
>> an application that fits into any fdo-compliant notification area, we do.
>
> Within GNOME we usually create a free
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 01:51:11PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 06:46:46 -0400, Scott Kitterman
> wrote:
> >Even if they are using a system
> >that allows them to go back and review their notification history when they
> >return to their system,
>
> It just occurred to me that
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 01:31:14PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> If we're making something GNOME-specific, we don't do that. If we make
> an application that fits into any fdo-compliant notification area, we do.
Within GNOME we usually create a freedesktop.org solution, then use that
within GNOM
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 12:31:22PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> Btw, I fear that systemd's binary logs are going to import this method
> of inefficient work in our world. I surely hope I am wrong on this
> count.
journalctl gives pretty much exactly the same output as
/var/log/messages and so on. As
On Thursday, May 30, 2013 05:11:06, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Chris Knadle [130529 08:29]:
> > - Exim configuration is more human readable than Postifx's, IMHO.
> >
> > Postfix configuration is concise but terse, and there are typically
> > blocks of options separated by commas that
On Thu, 30 May 2013 06:46:46 -0400, Scott Kitterman
wrote:
>Even if they are using a system
>that allows them to go back and review their notification history when they
>return to their system,
It just occurred to me that you are describing a mail client.
Greetings
Marc
--
---
On 30-05-13 12:16, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> On 29/05/13 08:18, Chris Knadle wrote:
>> - Exim is more popular
>>
>> http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.201201/mxsurvey.html
>
> This is actually quite interesting.
>
> Given that Postfix
1 - 100 of 302 matches
Mail list logo
