Qmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [djb@koobera.math.uic.edu: qmail 1.00 available]

To: qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Subject: Re: [djb@koobera.math.uic.edu: qmail 1.00 available]
From: Amitai Schlair <schmonz@schmonz.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:05:13 -0500
Delivered-to: sp-com-lists@consult.net
Delivered-to: gmail-qmail@securepoint.com
Delivered-to: sp.com.list@gmail.com
Delivered-to: mailing list qmail@list.cr.yp.to
In-reply-to: <20070222140051.76cdabb9.sasa@admin-networks.org>
Mailing-list: contact qmail-help@list.cr.yp.to; run by ezmlm
References: <20070222042303.GA74985@lizzy.catnook.local> <20070222140051.76cdabb9.sasa@admin-networks.org>
On Feb 22, 2007, at 8:00 AM, Sasa Ugrenovic wrote:

Is qmail usable ? I used qmail for 5 years before I switched to postfix. I hope DJB reads this, because qmail is obsolete... you have to apply a million patches (which have backward compatibility issues) to have a decent functional SMTP.
Greylisting, helo checks, blabla ..

I'm going to read this charitably and assume your first question was intended rhetorically.

Obviously, for you, for some definition of "usable", qmail isn't. Why not? Well, that's a combination of what qmail does and doesn't do + what various patches can do + what you're willing to do. Also obviously, for some other definition of "usable", qmail is, as you do use it in some contexts.

Maybe it seems like too much work to keep installing qmail with the changes you want. If so, I submit that you're working too hard. Take a few minutes and automate the process, and it stops being a problem.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>