On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 03:48:14PM -0700, Darren Spruell wrote: > On Dec 2, 2007 2:21 PM, Douglas A. Tutty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 12:56:11PM -0700, Anthony Roberts wrote: > > > > I have seen several installations of Postfix go catatonic due to spam > > > > overload, large messages, mailing list expansions, and other undiagnosed > > > > problems. These were run by Postfix lovers, so I have always assumed > > > > that the installation was correct. In the one case I saw tested > > > > replacing Postfix with Sendmail resulted in no further problems. > > > > > > I have seen equally catastrophic failures of Qmail. > > > > > > Trying to do mail right for everyone in base is an exercise in futility. > > > > > > > Does base require an MTA? If so, is there a tiny-drive-footprint > > local-only no-config MTA that could be in base? Everything else as a > > pre-compiled package or in alternate install sets? > > Why is everyone trying to come up with a solution to a problem that > doesn't exist?
The 'problem' is a piece of software installed on the box that some of us don't use. It takes up space (how much?). Each MTA has its champions and its detractors. The Solomonesque solution would be to remove the MTA from base altogether unless things in base need an MTA for local delivery, in which case installing something smaller than sendmail that can't be used for anything other than local delivery would be one solution to the 'problem'. That's all I'm suggesting. Doug.
