[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Qmail vas Sendmail



> * Lacks most of options sendmail has

Like what? UUCP mailers? Rules that no sane person (I do not count myself
among these ;) can understand, let alone use? 
I don't need industrial-strength assembler-driven mail-processing factory
at 99% of the time. I need simple fast MTA. And when I need the factory,
qmail allows it also, in some different way. But I can set it up quickly,
configure simply and use securely. What's bad in it?

> * Doesn't REALLY improve security, though better than sendmail in this
> issue

What's REALLY improving security? Not having remote/local root holes is
enough? Or should it come with bodyguard included? ;)

> * not-so-compatible

With? Sendmail? Well, so sendmail is not-so-compatible with qmail. Whose
fault it is? qmail is RFC-compliant, AFAIK, and that's enough.

> * Not used for serious businesses

Err, where is the (C)? It's not your phrase, not even your thought. I've
heard something like this 2-3 years ago about some OS we both know.

> * Obscure for ex-sendmail users

It took me about 15 minutes of RTFM to move from sendmail to qmail.
Qmail has far better docs on configuration. I've tried qmail in part
because of this - with sendmail it takes too much to figure out what I
need to configure and what "FOO{abc} $&*boo-boo $>96+$*" means there. 
-- 
frodo@sharat.co.il	\/  There shall be counsels taken
Stanislav Malyshev	/\  Stronger than Morgul-spells
phone +972-2-6245112	/\  		JRRT LotR.
http://sharat.co.il/frodo/	whois:!SM8333