On 5/30/08, DAve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eric Zimmerman wrote: >> Foo JH wrote: >>> I like Qmail. It's not overly difficult to configure, and it's >>> extensible. >>> >> >> and requires 400 patches to do basic things =( > > List them, not 100, not 399, all 400 please. > > Keep in mind that when your download x.x.x release of a software package > you are downloading a "patched" source code. Sendmail has been patched > many times, Postfix is patched, Exim is patched. qmail just requires you > apply your own patches. Patching is not a bad thing, shrinkwrap mail > admins applying patches that they do not understand is a bad thing. > >> >> heres some interesting reading about qmail... >> >> http://www.dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de/~ma/qmail-bugs.html > > That so much time and effort is spent telling everyone how bad qmail is > still amazes me. It is one of the best performing and most extensible > MTAs I have ever used. It is not however, suitable for those who choose > not to understand how mail works. Point and clickers should stay with > Postfix, also a very capable MTA.
I agree. No one should use Qmail unless they have read and completely understand every email-related RFC and have at least two years of experience running a commercial mail server. Amateurs shouldn't even consider it. Please, use anything but Qmail. It sprays backscatter spam all over the internet. - Bob _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"