>> [1] qmail's license used to be source distribution only, because that >> locked out anyone unable to compile it and its dependent packages and >> "killed the weak". Mail isn't that hard! Mortals can get Postfix going! >> > > That's not the worst part of the license. The real problem is that > qmail as written has several logical flaws, the above-mentioned > being the most obvious, and the license states that no one is > allowed to distribute modified versions so it can't be fixed > without completely replacing components. > There is a slight workaround. One can distribute the original + source + patches and a script that does the patching/installing. Hence the netqmail-1.05 version. Les, quit making false statements about qmail. qmail does not have any logical flaws otherwise Wietse would not follow the same design principles in postfix after his spat with DJB. qmail's problem is that the author has not done any updates to it since 1998 to handle the changed needs required of a MTA software since then. SMTP is broken which is why spammers and virus writers can create so much trouble. Both SMTP and qmail were designed in an environment very different from what we have now. That is why we have ESMTP and what not updates to the SMTP protocol. qmail is a fine piece of software and it also introduced the maildir format which is now widely supported and used by anyone who cares about the integrity of their mailboxes. I cannot understand what you have against qmail to go around bad mouthing it. Don't tell me a stuffed queue and perhaps a listing in some over zealous RBL was all it took.