Jussi Ekholm wrote: > Dairy Wall Limey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > if exim uses procmail as its LDA, no .forward is needed - your > > .procmailrc is read already. > > LDA was Local Delivery Agent, right? yup! > It's a great tool. Gotta try SpamAssasin, NoSpam and these different > spam catchers, too - so I wouldn't have to add new addresses in kill > list every week, like I now have to. yeah i don't know how i'd survive without procmail. i've heard good things about spam assassin. i use spambouncer (www.spambouncer.org) which is great. it does catch some stuff that isn't spam, so you do have to check your spam folder once in a while, but it's a big help to my sanity. > > since you don't need a .forward, my guess is that exim is indeed > > using procmail as an LDA (i don't think it has its own). it doesn't > > notice whether or not procmail is in use though.... > > And this might lead to...? The fact, that it doesn't notice if it is > in use or not, that is. oh nothing... the original post just asked if exim 'noticed that procmail was being used'.... this isn't exactly the case - exim will do what it's told to do w/r/t procmail, but it's not psychic or anything :P that's all i meant. > > with postfix (if mailbox_command isn't set to procmail -t) you don't > > need a fancy sendmail style .forward.... i just use: > > > > zugzug% cat .forward "| /usr/bin/procmail -t" > > > > which seems to work fine. > > Yeah, I have Exim and so far I've been totally satisfied with it. It > does the job it needs to do without a complaint. Is postfix better in > some way? i like postfix a lot personally... this is really a matter of preference. for a small machine i doubt it makes much difference, but i think postfix is a bit more secure and robust. i try to run it wherever possible. it combines the usability / and familiarity of sendmail with some of the performance advantages of qmail (and some of its own), plays nice with standard unix facilities, and its author is very responsive and takes a conservative approach to development (which i very much appreciate). we use exim on a couple of machines in the office and it seems to work pretty well. it's supposed to be fairly lightweight, so for a personal machine or a small mailserver it might be a good choice. > What are those wierd ?-characters in thread tree, by the way - in > 1.3.24i. see the previous thread on the subject following the announcement. i find them a bit distracting, and they seem to cause some weird threading in mailing lists that are gateways for newsgroups (i'd bet because there are extra message-ids and such referenced in the headers). basically they denote missing messages. -- William Yardley System Administrator, Newdream Network [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://infinitejazz.net/will/pgp/gpg.asc
