Ott K?stner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Boosten wrote:
>
>> The most recent vulnerabilities of Postfix are from August and September
>> 2008, and I still use it. Also I use (with great happyness) Sendmail on
>> two machines, without any problems. The only problem ever caused was by
>> clama
On 30 nov 2008, at 13:51, Ott Köstner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Peter Boosten wrote:
The most recent vulnerabilities of Postfix are from August and
September
2008, and I still use it. Also I use (with great happyness)
Sendmail on
two machines, without any problems. The only problem ever
Peter Boosten wrote:
The most recent vulnerabilities of Postfix are from August and September
2008, and I still use it. Also I use (with great happyness) Sendmail on
two machines, without any problems. The only problem ever caused was by
clamav.
Would be interesting to know, what kind of pro
Dan wrote:
> Peter Boosten([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.11.29 17:34:28 +0100:
>>> It's not prejudicial. I do not wish to start yet another MTA flamewar,
>>> but you can't deny Sendmail's poor security, design, performance, and
>>> complex configuration. The poor security history is there, the poor
>>>
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:04:34 -0500
Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Boosten([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.11.29 17:34:28 +0100:
> > Yeah, in 1845 it was. Sendmail is as secure as any other mta. And
> > using
>
> Simply not true. Sendmail has had TONS of remote vulnerabilities. Many
> people have
Peter Boosten([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.11.29 17:34:28 +0100:
>> It's not prejudicial. I do not wish to start yet another MTA flamewar,
>> but you can't deny Sendmail's poor security, design, performance, and
>> complex configuration. The poor security history is there, the poor
>> funnel design and
On 29 nov 2008, at 17:03, Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
It's not prejudicial. I do not wish to start yet another MTA flamewar,
but you can't deny Sendmail's poor security, design, performance, and
complex configuration. The poor security history is there, the poor
funnel design and conf
Jerry McAllister([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.11.24 14:38:19 -0500:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:36:50PM -0500, Dan wrote:
>
> > Kelly Jones([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.11.22 14:16:56 -0700:
> > > What Unix program sends email directly, using the MX record of the
> > > recipient, instead of using sendmail
Sendmail/Postfix/Exim/et al should suffice.
Take ure pick and use the one who's conf file you prefer.
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Kelly Jones
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What Unix program sends email directly, using the MX record of the
> recipient, instead of using sendmail or an insta
recipient, instead of using sendmail or an installed MTA?
Sendmail/Sendwhale sucks for just about anything. There are much better
as i like programs that "sucks", i use sendmail everywhere.
it's perfect
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:36:50PM -0500, Dan wrote:
> Kelly Jones([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.11.22 14:16:56 -0700:
> > What Unix program sends email directly, using the MX record of the
> > recipient, instead of using sendmail or an installed MTA?
>
> Sendmail/Sendwhale sucks for just about anythin
Kelly Jones([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.11.22 14:16:56 -0700:
> What Unix program sends email directly, using the MX record of the
> recipient, instead of using sendmail or an installed MTA?
Sendmail/Sendwhale sucks for just about anything. There are much better
MTAs out there. For your needs, I think
On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 14:16:56 -0700
"Kelly Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What Unix program sends email directly, using the MX record of the
> recipient, instead of using sendmail or an installed MTA?
>
> I realize I could tweak sendmail.cf/etc to do this, but that's not
> working in my (fair
What Unix program sends email directly, using the MX record of the
recipient, instead of using sendmail or an installed MTA?
I realize I could tweak sendmail.cf/etc to do this, but that's not
working in my (fairly unusual) special situation.
I also realize that sending email directly is normally
14 matches
Mail list logo
