[CentOS] Ultra simple mail server config?

Tue Jan 23 22:07:37 UTC 2007
John Summerfield <debian at herakles.homelinux.org>

Brent wrote:
> Plain FUD Qmailrocks works just fine. Only a complete Newbie can't install

Hmm, I note that while Qmailrocks points to the source of qmail, the 
qmail pages recommends lifewithqmail but does not mention qmailrocks.

> it.  The instructions are the easiest I ever seen for a  complete mail
> server. You need to have the right libaries for it to work but really that
> is basic stuff.
> I've installed about tons of installs of it and never had a problem.

You may never have perceived a problem, but that's not the same as not 
having a problem.

I note that qmail is not free software as defined by the FSF. I cannot 
even ungzip the tarball and bzip2 it without Dan (the author's approval) 
so as to save space when I distribute it. See 

If you don't want to build from source you should be using a different 

I have heard Bad Thing in the past about qmail, so googled for "the 
problem with qmail." Some hits, not a lot. This is rather old, and the 
author's fond of postfix (as am I) (but he was expert in qmail):
It speaks of licence, the author's attitude, problemss working with 
other software such as smartlist.

This is more recent:
 > The problem with qmail is that you need either a big patchset or
 > a once patched setup and reuse that. Plus qmail really has
 > some not-so-nice bugs.

Oh, shhh sugar! This was written for RHL 6.x. I says,

1. download qmail 1.03 (or latest - but it hasn't changed in a *long* 

He's right. 1.03 is the latest listed at http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html 
and http://cr.yp.to/qmail.html
Version 1.0, the first general release, was announced on February, 20, 
1997. The current version, 1.03, was released on June, 15, 1998.

It looks to me that qmail is high-maintenance; www.qmail.org is one site 
that attempts to make it usable, but if DJB ever releases a newer 
version then what to do with all those patches?

It's like mixing and matching kernel patches.

I don't see any patches to fix security problems, but I am not prepared 
to believe there are no security problems. There are patches to fix 
standards non-compliance (eg RFC 1870 and RFC 2821) and nobody can 
distribute source with them preapplied. Instead, they must distribute 
patch alone or source-plus-patch.

>>The qmailrocks setup leaves you with broken qmail.  Ask on the qmail
>>list if you
>>really want to know the gory details.
>>If you're really interested in running qmail properly, I'd highly
>>recommend following
>>www.lifewithqmail.org or Matt Simpson's qmail-toaster scripts.
>>Brent wrote:
>>>Although not to most simple  to install I thought I would add another
>>>to the mix qmailrocks is a great how to. Once it is setup it is a super
>>>easy server to maintain.
>>>the site is www.qmailrocks.com
>>>The one below looks like a great one too.
>>>>Dave wrote:
>>>>>Does such a HOW-TO exist?
>>>>>If not, and there are experts here willing to help
>>>>>out, I would be happy to write up my experience.
>>>>>Thank you for reading,
>>>>	Try Johnny's Postfix w/dovecot install guides @
>>>>Best Regards,
>>>>Camron W. Fox
>>>>Hilo Office
>>>>High Performance Computing Group
>>>>Fujitsu America, INC.
>>>>E-mail:		cwfox at us.fujitsu.com
>>>>CentOS mailing list
>>>>CentOS at centos.org
>>>CentOS mailing list
>>>CentOS at centos.org
>>Peter Serwe <peter at infostreet dot com>
>>"The only true sports are bullfighting, mountain climbing and auto
>>racing." -Earnest Hemingway
>>"Because everything else requires only one ball." -Unknown
>>"Do you wanna go fast or suck?" -Mike Kojima
>>"There are two things no man will admit he cannot do well: drive and make
>>love." -Sir Stirling Moss
>>CentOS mailing list
>>CentOS at centos.org
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos



-- spambait
1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu  Z1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu

Please do not reply off-list