-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 01:06:39AM +0800, Feizhou wrote: > >>sendmail led to qmail led to postfix > >> > >>I am sure exim fits somewhere :D > > > >Actually, exim somes from S/Mail :) > > From smail's page: Smail-3 was written as a Sendmail replacement for > 'normal' people > normal was italized. I remembered there was a connection some where :D :) > >>>Anyway, I think your solution, even tho it does have many merits, will > >>>add unneeded complexity to Alain's setup. > >> > >>He still needs a virtual backend. Either learn to use someone else's > >>tools or make your own... > > > >If he really opts for a virtual backend, and he doesn't have a problem > >with "blackbox" solutions, there are some nice ones based on qmail. > >I would never use it, but some people use and like it. > > Well, it probably just that I have not seen one for postfix yet, not > that i looked.... Me neither. I have been running e-mail server for so long, that I really don't care about these "blackbox" solutions. They are more trouble than they are worth. > >>Simple it is. There is absolutely NOTHING to do after initial > >>installation and configuration. Oh, you meant the setup? Well, some > >>manage with help, others won't get anywhere without. > > > >I have installed qmail twice. Trying to get any HA system in place > >with it was a nightmare. > > HA? No way with any other MTA unless you have some form of centralized > delivery information for the mta to a SAN/FC/NFS (ack!)/some form of > shared storage. EMC storage if you have the cash. AFS if you don't. NFS is as unreliable as it gets. > >But I can symptize with you. I (me, myself) find postfix a pain > >to configure. > > I don't find postfix a pain to configure...besides Devdas and one of my > managers, there is no other postfix guy where i work. We do have an exim > guy :D. postfix requires more reading to maintain and configure. It gets > an unfair advantage by being preinstalled and preconfigured for system > account delivery and thereby making it appear simple. Yeah, the bastards :) Actually, as long as you have a sound base system (qmail, exim, postfix, even zmailer), and someone with a few years experience, you can always get a good system. > >>AH, we have a slight misunderstanding here. procmail don't handle > >>.forward files I believe. procmail is a filtering program. Its > >>competitor/comparison would be maildrop for which I'd vouch for given > >>procmail's cpu hogging properties. > >> > >>.forward simply does not match .qmail > > > > > >Oh. .forward has nothing to do with "local delivery". You are correct > >in comparing procmail with maildrop. Those are the one we can classify > >as "local delivery system". > > how can you say that? .forward provides delivery instructions for > locally delivered mails so how come you say that it has nothing to do > with "local delivery"? Actually, .forward provides intra-MTA routing instructions, not delivery instructions :) I agree "nothing to do" was a little strong worded, since everything has to do with local delivery. That is, after all, what the whole e-mail system is about. > >But yes, if you are comparing ".forward" with ".qmail", you are correct. > >Myself, I like ".procmailrc" better :) Or .exim_filter, which can be > >configured, but I really don't recomend. Exim filters are so "powerful" > >that I tend to consider them more of a security problem than a feature. > >I'm just happy they are not enabled by default, and even take a little > >doing to get running. > > So exim has its own filtering agent too? I must look at exim one day. Yup. You can even use it to do most things people usually do with amavis. I have a server where I implemented individual message size limiting, so each group of uses will have a different limit, entirely based on exim filters. Of course, exim is monolitic, so I would not say it has its own filtering agent. It has a filtering system :) Actually, you can do almost everything you get from procmail with exim filters. I'm just used to write procmail rules, and have a huge database of those, so I keep using it for the sake of simplicity (and not reinventing the weel). > Hmm...probably time to take this offlist if we continue :P Nah. No one started screaming yet, or even compared us to Bryan. So we still have some room :) - -- Rodrigo Barbosa <rodrigob at suespammers.org> "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDlcoYpdyWzQ5b5ckRAqUqAJsFZwGVE/R5h7xtu9zOhYFCxlRv9wCdHL6o /Hs6ikWBj9lm/FNZoPtrsms= =DN7b -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----