🚀 go-pugleaf

clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:
>>I'm confused... why are people using smail 2.5 (and soon a 2.7) when
>>smail 3.? is available ?
>
>Because smail 3.x is:
>
>	a) a different program altogether
>	b) *enormous* (comparatively speaking)
>	c) vast overkill for uucp-only sites.
>
>Smail's 2.x's big advantage is that it is very small and
>very easy to install.  And does just what the small site
>usually wants.

The one big problem with smail 2.x is that's not very RFC 822 compliant
and headers often escape unqualified.  In the past I've chosen smail 3.1
over 2.5 because of this and other problems.  Here on ZOOiD we're using
Zmailer, which for a UUCP site like us is even vaster overkill. Aside from
being RFC 822 compliant, damit, we use it because it's also extreamly 
configurable, it allows us do to things we'd have to hardcode into
C with any other mailer.  Smail 2.x is fine mailer for small UUCP-only
sites, but it's pretty limited and often leaves a fair bit to be
desired.

							Ross Ridge
-- 
Ross Ridge - The Great HTMU					     l/	 //
								    [OO][oo]
ross@zooid.guild.org						    /()\/()/
uunet.ca!torag!zooid!ross					     db	 //