Article View: comp.unix.sys5.r4
Article #779Re: Raves about mailsurr
From: david.e.wexelblat
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 17:11
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 17:11
55 lines
3517 bytes
3517 bytes
[I should probably just keep my mouth shut, but...] In article <id.IP9Y.PSI@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes: > In article <dan.731768031@dribble> dan@dribble.c-mols.siu.edu (Dan Ellison) writes: > > In <id.8D8Y.OTL@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes: > > >In article <C3FHnE.C4s@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes: > > >> Have you tried Smail3? Compared to 2.5 it's a *big* clean package that's > > >> still easy to configure and is easier to compile under sysV than sendmail. > > > >When I can install it under Xenix-286 without putting more man-weeks into > > >it than I'm willing to right now, I'll be delighted to give it a try. Right > > >now a *small* package is a major advantage. > > > Then again, sendmail and sendmail-IDA have already been ported.... You can > > get ready to run versions of both for SCO UNIX on ftp.c-mols.siu.edu in > > the sco-ports directory. > > Um, Xenix-286 is neither Xenix-386, nor is it SCO UNIX. Porting today's > highly VAXist software to the 286 is a challenge to weary Heracles, let > alone a busy system administrator who's got enough on his plate with user > requested ports. > > This is without even bringing up little details like sendmail being a > screaming horror from the sewers of hell. > -- > Peter da Silva `-_-' > Ferranti International Controls Corporation 'U` > Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012 USA > +1 713 274 5180 "Zure otsoa besarkatu al duzu gaur?" Peter, all of this started with you raving about mailsurr (the SVR4 mailer). This is how the discussion has gone: 1) mailsurr is the greatest (Peter) 2) Well it can't do X,Y, and X. Sendmail and smail3 can (me and a couple others). 3) Why would anyone want to runs sendmail (Peter) 4) They don't; run smail3, it's easier (me and a couple others) 5) When I can run it on Xenix-286, then talk to me (Peter) Does anyone other than me find it incredibly bizarre that Peter is raving in favor of a mailer that's ONLY available on SVR4, then tries to shoot down other people's arguments for other MTA's because they don't run on Xenix-286? MAILSURR DOESN'T RUN ON XENIX EITHER. this is sad... -- David Wexelblat <dwex@mtgzfs3.att.com> (908) 957-5871 AT&T Bell Laboratories, 200 Laurel Ave - 3F-428, Middletown, NJ 07748 "In and around the lake, mountains come out of the sky. They stand there." -- Yes, Roundabout
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1993Mar11.171136.29689@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!network.ucsd.edu!pacbell.com!att-out!cbnewsj!dwexReferences:
<id.8D8Y.OTL@ferranti.com> <dan.731768031@dribble> <id.IP9Y.PSI@ferranti.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f4424,3ae24ce5dbfc4f90 X-Google-Attributes: gidf4424,public X-Google-Thread: 1122ea,3ae24ce5dbfc4f90 X-Google-Attributes: gid1122ea,public X-Google-Thread: f6a6c,3ae24ce5dbfc4f90 X-Google-Attributes: gidf6a6c,public X-Google-Thread: 10c665,3ae24ce5dbfc4f90 X-Google-Attributes: gid10c665,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1993-03-11 10:11:48 PST Newsgroups: comp.unix.sys5.r4,comp.unix.sys5.r3,comp.mail.misc,biz.sco.general Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!network.ucsd.edu!pacbell.com!att-out!cbnewsj!dwex From: dwex@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (david.e.wexelblat) Subject: Re: Raves about mailsurr Organization: AT&T Distribution: usa Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 17:11:36 GMT Message-ID: <1993Mar11.171136.29689@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> References: <id.8D8Y.OTL@ferranti.com> <dan.731768031@dribble> <id.IP9Y.PSI@ferranti.com> Lines: 55