From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 30 15:39:14 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BFC81065680 for ; Fri, 30 May 2008 15:39:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave.list@pixelhammer.com) Received: from smtp2.tls.net (smtp2.tls.net [65.196.224.83]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F4818FC0A for ; Fri, 30 May 2008 15:39:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave.list@pixelhammer.com) Received: (qmail 22069 invoked from network); 30 May 2008 15:39:13 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.2.3 ppid: 22059, pid: 22065, t: 0.1818s scanners: attach: 1.2.3 clamav: 0.91.1/m:45/d:6125 spam: 3.2.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.1 (2007-05-02) on smtp-2.tls.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=20.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,TVD_RCVD_IP autolearn=disabled version=3.2.1 Received: from 64-184-9-72.bb.hrtc.net (HELO ?192.168.1.42?) (ldg%tls.net@64.184.9.72) by auth-smtp2.tls.net with ESMTPA; 30 May 2008 15:39:13 -0000 Message-ID: <48401F97.9010003@pixelhammer.com> Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 11:39:03 -0400 From: DAve User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <483EE95F.8000509@studsvik.com> <483FAD90.6010101@extracktor.com> <484013A7.6020507@mikestammer.com> In-Reply-To: <484013A7.6020507@mikestammer.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Need to build a new mail server X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 15:39:14 -0000 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. DAve -- In 50 years, our descendants will look back on the early years of the internet, and much like we now look back on men with rockets on their back and feathers glued to their arms, marvel that we had the intelligence to wipe the drool from our chins.