Quoting Yonah Russ, from the post of Sat, 05 Nov:
On the other hand, qmail is such a pain to install (I mean download, patch,
patch, patch,,patch and install) it ends up wasting more time than any
server update.
I apt-get install qmail-src and the patching and building is done for
me. I
On 11/11/05, Ira Abramov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Yonah Russ, from the post of Sat, 05 Nov: On the other hand, qmail is such a pain to install (I mean download, patch, patch, patch,,patch and install) it ends up wasting more time than any
server update.I apt-get install qmail-src and
I agree with Ira's comments - qmail is not difficult to install.
It is robust, low maintenance and it works superbly with SA and ClamAV
Spam Assasin is a different story entirely - you gotta know your stuff
administering SA in a high volume environment
dL
Ira Abramov wrote:
Quoting Yonah
On 11/6/05, Omer Zak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then all it will miss is mod_bootloader.
You forgot the catch-all mod_emacs.
Uh uh, tsk tsk. mod_vi comes first, I say!
-- Arik
Hi all!
I set up an anti-qmail page at:
http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/anti/qmail/
Comments, suggestions, corrections and flames are welcome.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
-
Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage:
You of course forgot almost unmatched security (no security issues in
32-bit machines, only in 64-bit machines).
The fact that DJB has bad attitude doesn't affect the fact he knows how to
write code (try djbdns as well). I suggest you won't buy anything from him
- but that's your call.
It's
On Saturday 05 November 2005 18:34, Orr Dunkelman wrote:
You of course forgot almost unmatched security (no security issues in
32-bit machines, only in 64-bit machines).
I didn't place it there on purpose.
The fact that DJB has bad attitude doesn't affect the fact he knows how to
write code
Hi
Just one observation:
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 06:34:52PM +0200, Orr Dunkelman wrote:
And of course, the most important stuff - it is an open source (not free
software). Last time I tried to compile it, it went by the book.
the people from OSI have not managed to trademark open soruce,
iF I set up an anti-qmail page at:
iF
iF http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/anti/qmail/
I think that if you make some claims (like: qmail lags behind other MTA's
in its feature-set), it is good to substantiate them, like say which
features it lacks and how important are they. With that, it
I personally agree with every word.
So what if people don't find bugs in qmail. Does it make a difference
to me whether the bug exists or whether the bug is found and patched
before anyone exploits it.
Chances are that if you use a supported distribution and you update
regularly, any bugs will
I set up an anti-qmail page at:
http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/anti/qmail/
Comments, suggestions, corrections and flames are welcome.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
I don't want to express any opinion about qmail. It has some good
points, and Dan Bernstein should be credited for
On 11/5/05, Eli Marmor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Maybe it's too early to include mod_smtpd in the list of alternatives,
but I believe that in the long run, it has good chances to become the
best MTA for Linux/UNIX, especially if it will be integrated well with
the HTTP module, as well
On Sun, 2005-11-06 at 02:22 +0200, Arik Baratz wrote:
On 11/5/05, Eli Marmor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Maybe it's too early to include mod_smtpd in the list of alternatives,
but I believe that in the long run, it has good chances to become the
best MTA for Linux/UNIX, especially if
13 matches
Mail list logo
