Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sendmail configuration
On 11/26/20 6:56 PM, Grant Edwards wrote: After trying to think of reasons to use sendmail, I beganto wonder if it still supports bang-routing and UUCP as a transport mechanism. A bit of googling seems to indicate that it does. Yes. I have used this a few times in the last 18 months. Mostly for fun through my small UUCP network. So there's one thing (that I do understand) that can be done with sendmail that can't (AFAICT) be done with the usual replacements. I thought at least one of the other contemporary MTAs also supported UUCP. I would assume anything that does support UUCP would also support bang-routing as I believe that's more of a UUCP function than an MTA function. So I'm surprised at the idea that other things that do support UUCP don't support bang-routing. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sendmail configuration
On 26/11/2020 04:09, Grant Edwards wrote: On 2020-11-26, the...@sys-concept.com wrote: Thank you for input. Maybe that is why it is so hard to find good explanation/howto how to configure it. The config file looks very simple, that is I decided to try it. Ah, that's another devine mystery. I believe that the small size of a sendmail config file, when compared to the number of malfunctions it can create violates several basic tenants of information theory. I think the explanation involves extra dimensions that normal software can't access. The problem is that sendmail is the kitchen sink of mtas. It was written in a much gentler time, when people hadn't even thought of spam, and the standard wan link was a mag-tape in a van or a 300-baud modem. The original author (Eric Allman) got it working reasonably well and then forgot about it. Other people then customised it to buggery. Then the Internet hit. Then Eric tried to re-impose some semblance of design and remove the worst topsy effects. Then assorted people wrote competing emailers like qmail, postfix, etc. But they all had to be sendmail-compatible... So a fully-functional sendmail installation is the most powerful, flexible mta there is out there. The snag is, most people only use 10% of that power, but nobody can agree on which 10% is the most important. Cheers, Wol
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sendmail configuration
On 11/25/20 9:02 PM, Grant Edwards wrote: O'Reilly's_Sendmail_ 4th Edition (the bat book), has 1312 pages and weighs four pounds. There is actually a much smaller book than the quintessential Bat book that is multiple orders of magnitude. IM(ns)HO the Sendmail Installation and Operation Guide is well worth reading by anyone that wants to be serious about administering sendmail. I have (re)read (multiple versions of) it multiple times in my multi-decade fling with Sendmail. Take part of an afternoon every few years and skim it and / or read new / updated parts of it. It's usually with the sendmail source code. But you can easily search the web for multiple copies of it. I've read the SIOG multiple times cover-to-cover. I've never read more than 20-30 pages of the Bat book at any given time. Aside: I have a low opinion of many O'Reilly books when it comes to learning something new. They are frequently the definitive reference, second only to source code. But reference material is not the best way to learn. Think man page vs tutorials. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sendmail configuration
On 11/25/20 9:09 PM, Grant Edwards wrote: Ah, that's another devine mystery. I believe that the small size of a sendmail config file, when compared to the number of malfunctions it can create violates several basic tenants of information theory. I think the explanation involves extra dimensions that normal software can't access. That's because the sendmail.mc file is not a configuration file in the normal sense of the word. It is a collection of macros that are then expanded into the configuration file. There are many subtle inter dependencies that are not obvious. Many are documented in the cf/README file in the sendmail source bundle. Not all distros include said file. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: sendmail configuration
On 04:02 Thu 26 Nov 2020, Grant Edwards wrote: On 2020-11-26, the...@sys-concept.com wrote: I've always used postifx but I want to try sendmail this time. Appropos of nothing, might we ask why? I've heard there are things that you can do with sendmail that you can't do with postfix or exim or qmail, but the descriptions of what sorts of "things" would require sendmail were rarely intelligible to a mere mortal. And I have a hard time finding gentoo howto. Back when we used to sendmail on SunOS in the early 90's the generally accepted approach was to copy somebody else's config file that almost worked, change things more or less at random and then watch the disks fill up and the network crash. The miraculous part was that the disk would fill up but all the mail would disappear. I think sendmail configuration was where "cargo cult" programming originated. From "The Unix-Hater's Handbook" Sendmail: The Vietnam of Berkeley Unix Sendmail is the standard Unix mailer, and it is likely to remain the standard Unix mailer for many, many years. Although other mailers (such as MMDF and smail) have been written, none of them simultaneously enjoy sendmail’s popularity or widespread animosity. O'Reilly's _Sendmail_ 4th Edition (the bat book), has 1312 pages and weighs four pounds. Head up the river if you must, but don't get out of the boat. -- Grant On the lighter side, it famously known that , if you poke at sendmail conf more than once, then you are effected by the paranoia and which is not good for you and others around you. :) ~Bhaskar signature.asc Description: PGP signature
