Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:35:12 -0700 From: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> To: Chris Phillips <chris@selkie.org> Cc: John Kendler <fbsdquestions@hotmail.com>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Any mail server software that could run on FreeBSD? Message-ID: <200104271735.f3RHZCc07548@ptavv.es.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:57:35 PDT." <Pine.BSF.4.21.0104270848350.7719-100000@shell.bchosting.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:57:35 -0700 (PDT) > From: Chris Phillips <chris@selkie.org> > > > > On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > > > Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 07:46:24 -0700 (PDT) > > > From: Chris Phillips <chris@selkie.org> > > > Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG > > > > > > You're welcome to your opinion. We could start a flame but let's not. As > > > I state before, sendmail is a great option. > > > > > > -Chris Phillips > > > > > > On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, John Kendler wrote: > > > > > > > umm sendmail is not reccomended, use qmail if you can. > > > > OK. Chris recommends sendmail. John does not and prefers qmail. (FWIW, > > I prefer postfix.) But the statement sendmail is recommended is at > > best misleading. YOU recommend sendmail and you phrase the response > > like it is a generally accepted statement when it is far from it. > > I have to disagree with you chief. Every install of FreeBSD since I > started using it around 2.1.5 (I think?) has had a default install of > sendmail. It's called inertia, not recommendation. Until fairly recently sendmail with THE MTA for Unix systems. There were no real alternatives and, with no alternatives, sendmail was made a part of the FreeBSD base distribution. Since then, at least two MTAs of reasonable design for general use have been developed. There is significant opinion that sendmail is NOT the best, but switching the default mailer is not a trivial thing. It will be very tricky to do this and not break lots of installed systems. NetBSD has recently changed their default mailer to postfix and there has been discussion of the same for FreeBSD, but I doubt it will happen because the FreeBSD core team rightly places great importance on not breaking things for the installed user base and I don't think that there is any tool to translate a .cf file (or even a .mc file) into a postfix configuration. This is not relevant to the issue of a new user trying to decide what tool to use. And it certainly should not be taken as any sort of recommendation from either the FreeBSD community or the core team (of which I am not a member nor can I speak for). > > I'd look at qmail, postfix, and sendmail. I suspect you will decide to > > ditch sendmail after a week of trying to understand configuration > > files, but you may love them. :-) If you don't need anything special, > > the defaults do work. MC files make life much easier than in the old > > days, too. > > Sendmail isn't really that hard and I find it MUCH more versatile than > qmail, especially when it comes to virtual users. I agree with you that there are some significant limitation to Qmail, but if these limits are not relevant to your use, qmail might be a perfectly good choice. My experience with it is very limited, so I don't know. > > Qmail and postfix are MUCH easier to configure and Postfix was written > > with security in mind from the beginning by the guy at IBM who brought > > us tcpwrappers, so tends to do the right things from the start with > > little chance of buffer overflow problems and the like. > > Configuration ease is a matter of opinion. Agreed, though I suspect that, of those who have used both postfix and sendmail, few would call sendmail configuration easier including some who use sendmail. (FWIW, I prefer postfix, but still use sendmail on many systems because it works and "it ain't broke".) > > But make your own choice because, other than personal opinions, none > > is "recommended". > > I do not believe any single piece of software has had such a drastic > rewrite of code. Sendmail itself has been quite secure for quite some > time. The only issue that comes to mind in recent memory was an issue > that was Linux specific. Possibly true. The line count of code in 8.11 that was in 5.6 is probably very small. > I think you will find that sendmail is more robust than any of it's > counterparts as well as FAR more widely used world wide. It is certainly the most widely used, but popularity is not a measure of quality. Vox populi is a terribly common argument that is almost always invalid. Even in US presidential elections. :-) Since popularity is important, I guess you also recommend switching to Windows? :-) > I personally dislike qmail and postfix as well and the not brought up > exim and I have valid reasons for my opinions. Long live sendmail! Feel free to use sendmail and to recommend it. It's good software and has been beaten on far more than any other. I will continue to use postfix for new installations until/unless I am convinced that there is a better choice and will continue to recommend it to others. Just don't imply any consensus on it being the best choice unless you are privy to some information I am not. R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200104271735.f3RHZCc07548>