On Tue, 27 October 1998 17:36:44 -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > I've always found exim's configuration to be formidable. It is > configurable but not easially configurable. You do have the read the (very > long) documents detailing the mechanics for what is going on and have to > understand them before you can attempt anything more than a trivial > modification.
Not quite, IMHO. I worked a lot with Smail before and once you get the difference between router and director, it all works. It took me one hour to implement rbsmtp and it worked. I may send some useful transports to Mark Baker, if they're considered useful.. > After that it is not terribly bad.. But definately not something I would > wish on someone who does not understand mail. If you just want to make it work, it's not harder than Smail... *You* seem to judge from your point of you, but I think the comparison to make is between Smail (the default right now) and Exim. Someone who does not understand mail won't have less problems with Smail? > qmail is definately the easiest to setup there is no configuration > language you need to learn. However if you want to do anything outside of > what is provided then you have to start writing scripts/code/whatever. qmail sux on low-bandwidth/low-volume sites. djb kinda sux. but it works, it does its job, indeed. but not for debian, right? (license, source-only) You're moving the discussion from "Exim as default" to "Let's have a look at what mailers are out there" ...? Does this help? Alexander -- "I am First Omet'iklan, and I am dead. As of this moment, we are all dead. We go into battle to reclaim our lives. This we do gladly, for we are Jem'Hadar. Remember, victory is life." -- Omet'iklan Alexander Koch - <>< - aka Efraim - PGP - 0xE7694969 - Hannover - Germany
