On 04Jan2014 20:01, Matthias Apitz <g...@unixarea.de> wrote: > El día Sunday, January 05, 2014 a las 02:50:12AM +0800, Chris Down escribió: > > On 2014-01-04 19:35:19 +0100, Ulrich Lauther wrote: > > > Recent posts made me aware of the fact, that mutt supports SMPT. > > > So far I have been using postfix for mail transport. > > > Which way is better, and why? > > > > "Better" is subjective. Using Postfix for this is pretty heavy duty over > > using a purpose-built MTA. > > I'm using mutt (right now by typing) on my FreeBSD netbook, connected > via UMTS WAN to my ISP. My mutt drops the mail (this mail) to the local > MTA (sendmail) and this takes care for the transport to the next MX hop, > even if the WAN link is down; the mail gets queued until the link comes > up again. I think this, queuing, is a big advantage over talking SMTP > directly by mutt.
I agree. I'm running postfix on my Mac (it ships with postfix installed). Local queuing. Automatic retry accordidng to a sensible policy. AND:... All the local systems that send email (eg cron and innumerable shell scripts) can send email via the UNIX standard "sendmail" executable. Use a real mail system locally. A win. Cheers, -- Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au> I swear to god, officer, I'm fixing this bridge. Just go divert traffic.
