>>...
>
>DJB is generally of the opinion that if you do not know how to properly
>configure your mail server, you should be hiring someone who does. So
>no, his software generally does not work right out of the box.
>
><opinion - not troll>
>Personally I have some rather harsh ideas about mail server admins after
>the previous two years. In fact I think the configuration of a running
>mail server should be difficult and require considerable thought and
>planning. My Postmaster mailbox agrees with me ;^)
></opinion>
>
>Qmail can properly report received headers and does so quite well with a
>large level of customization, if the admin takes the time to read and
>understand the documentation. The problem stated above is simply
>corrected by the proper use of the start script in qmail. No patching is
>required to run a servicable qmail server, reading the documentation is
>however, required. So the qmail server in question did not "fail" to
>report the host name or IP, the mail admin "failed" to properly
>configure his choosen mail server software.
>
>DAve
>
All points agreed. The primary problem with qmail installations
is the administrator, not the program itself (clearly it works correctly
at many sites). That said, I began refusing to help people with qmail a
few years ago - most who asked for help had no reason why they chose it
over any other MTA except "Joe Friend said it was the best". For small
sites, sendmail is hard to get wrong (I use a mixture of sendmail and
Postfix, but see no problem with any MTA the administrator feels good
about *and* knows how to operate - and qmail has a steeper learning
curve than many others - ignoring the issues of all the various patches
floating around). Simply, there are far too many Linux sites using qmail
that has not been configured at all, let alone properly - many of these
same ones are also using "localhost.localdomain" for their host name:)
Paul Shupak
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
