home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix.sco
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!wupost!gumby!destroyer!mudos!mju
- From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst)
- Subject: Re: Mailer replacement for Xenix
- Message-ID: <BuLMsu.96@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us>
- Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:55:30 GMT
- References: <9209121040.AA25968@dynamix.com> <BuHxy5.24r@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us> <1992Sep14.161119.25498@Celestial.COM>
- Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI
- Lines: 26
-
- In article <1992Sep14.161119.25498@Celestial.COM> bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) writes:
- >I'm glad you told me that Marc! I've been running smail 2.5 on
- >camco for several years now with over 50 connections pumping
- >about 5MB of mail traffic every day, and we're the smart-host for
- >most of these sites. I wonder where all the mail has been going!
-
- Well, there's an exception to every rule. :-)
-
- Granted, it *is* possible to do complex e-mail setups with smail2.5,
- as you have demonstrated. However, it has been my experience that
- smail3 is easier to port, easier to install, and easier to maintain
- than smail2.5. Many of the parameters that are compiled into smail2.5
- are in config files under smail3, which makes it easier to test config
- changes and make changes on-the-fly. smail2.5's aliasing features are
- somewhat limited; smail3 implements aliases in one of the
- configuration files, which makes the possibilities practically
- limitless.
-
- And, as you mention, smail2.5 does not do SMTP. Note that SMTP !=
- Internet; there are some very interesting things you can do with
- batched SMTP over a UUCP link. (Batched & compressed e-mail, anyone?)
-
- --
- Marc Unangst | Real men don't use Windows. Real men use X.
- mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us | Only a real man would use a GUI where the
- | shift keys after "Alt" are "Super" and "Hyper."
-