Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Saying that exim is bad because it handles a nearly impossible situation > in an almost-perfect way (as opposed to perfectly) seems rather silly to > me.
I don't think I said exim is bad because of that, if anyone interpreted it that way I am sorry (me using it should be proof enough I like exim). I think it is, or at least can be, a bad idea to configure exim, or any MTA, to use NFS for mailstore. The reasons of course lie outside the scope of an MTA (and rightfully so) and therefore I would not fault an MTA for not being able to work well with NFS. > Exim can do Maildir and NFS; and it can even do mbox on NFS semi-safely. > That's more than you can say for most other MTAs. True, but I still think it's a bad idea, regardless how well an MTA works around it. My point is, the mere fact software has to work around flaws of a certain system proves that system (NFS in this case) is less capable (to put it nicely) with regards to the specific functionality. Best regards, Jeroen -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
