On Thursday, August 1, 2002, at 04:23 PM, Marcin Sochacki wrote:
IMO, exim and postfix are comparable and there's no huge difference
which favours one of them. I use exim in all my installations, they are
usually small to medium size, but even with big ones, I would consider
exim as a good MTA.
A l
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 10:55:58AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> exim is basically smail done right.
>
> it's adequate for a small site with low mail volumes, but it doesn't
> scale very well.
Have you got some real experimental data about exim's scalability
or just guessing?
> IMO, exim is a po
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 03:49:31PM +0100, Shri Shrikumar wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-07-30 at 03:35, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > alternatively, just run postfix. it does everything that qmail does
> > and more, with a lot less hassle.
>
> What about exim ? It is installed as standard by debian.
exim is b
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 03:49:35PM -0700, Angus Scott-Fleming wrote:
> Thanks to all for an interesting and informative discussion
> (so far). It has not degenerated into flamewars; I think
> proponents of qmail and postfix have stated their cases well
> without descending into wars over The On
Thanks to all for an interesting and informative discussion
(so far). It has not degenerated into flamewars; I think
proponents of qmail and postfix have stated their cases well
without descending into wars over The One True Way.
Angus
Hello!
On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 01:48:57PM -0700, Angus Scott-Fleming wrote:
...
> What are your problems with qmail? What do you like about the
> Postfix comm. that QMail lacks? Not trolling for flamewars
...
My personal experiences:
Sendmail - cryptic macro language
Exim - delightfull rel
On Tue, 2002-07-30 at 03:35, Craig Sanders wrote:
> alternatively, just run postfix. it does everything that qmail does and
> more, with a lot less hassle.
What about exim ? It is installed as standard by debian.
I use exim. Is it worth switching ?
Shri
--
> "EvB" == Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
me> Sendmail is _very_ flexible but it is probably not good for the
me> inexperienced admin. If you are willing to read documentation
me> and M4 doesn't scare you, it is a fairly safe bet.
EvB> Which bet being safe?
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 03:10:42PM -0400, Bulent Murtezaoglu wrote:
> [This is exactly the kind of exchange I was trying to avoid, oh well]
Yes, but it's fun once in a while, isn't it ;-)
> > "EvB" == Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> EvB> In short, you can only compar
On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 05:16:33PM -0400, Bulent Murtezaoglu wrote:
> Qmail by default wants to operate by DJB's rules and it tries to
> DJB-ize the remainder of your system. This much I know and dislike.
that's the major problem with qmail (indeed with all of djb's software).
he is a good prog
On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 03:35:14PM -0700, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> > will I need sourcecode for apache to set up suEXEC options for
> > virtual hosting in my own choice of directory tree (i.e.
> > DocRoot in /www-data instead of the default /var/www)?
>
> Not needed. You can sometimes use sed. (I
> will I need sourcecode for apache to set up suEXEC options for
> virtual hosting in my own choice of directory tree (i.e.
> DocRoot in /www-data instead of the default /var/www)?
Not needed. You can sometimes use sed. (I say sometimes because sometimes
it works with the binary suexec.) Or I ha
> "ASF" == Angus Scott-Fleming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
ASF> What are your problems with qmail?
I know it works reasonably well but I have not used it personally
myself for any amount of time and certainly not professionally. I did
end up troubleshooting it at one point because
On 29 Jul 2002 at 15:10, Bulent Murtezaoglu wrote:
> [This is exactly the kind of exchange I was trying to avoid, oh well]
IMHO as a newbie this is just the kind of exchange I was
hoping for (trolling for?) ;-)
> > "EvB" == Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [...]
> EvB> In
[This is exactly the kind of exchange I was trying to avoid, oh well]
> "EvB" == Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
EvB> In short, you can only compare qmail and sendmail. Not only
EvB> does the latter have a bad reputation for complexity, but for
EvB> its amount o
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 09:55:20AM -0700, Angus Scott-Fleming wrote:
> any comments on qmail or procmail vs sendmail welcome. I've
> heard Bad Things about sendmail's complexity but it _is_ the
> standard ... what do you use for MLM? mailman?
Let's compare apples with apples here ;-)
Q
Did you mean to reply off-list? Please, let's take this back
to the list.
On 29 Jul 2002 at 12:35, Bulent Murtezaoglu wrote:
>
> Hi, I occasionally train people on this and the advice that will work
> for you depends on what exactly you are after and how you like to
> learn. If you enjoy read
17 matches
Mail list logo
