Article View: ont.uucp
Article #44Re: Pathalias question
From: Bruce Becker
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1992 19:40
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1992 19:40
54 lines
2523 bytes
2523 bytes
In article <1992Apr6.132842.25227@zooid.guild.org> ross@zooid.UUCP (Ross Ridge) writes: |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. I'd appreciate it if you'd be a lot more specific as to what non-RFC-822 compliance there is in smail 2.5. I'm not particularly aware of any, and since there may be a new release of smail 2.x, your comments might serve more than just idle curiosity. I run a not-so-small uucp site 8^), and for the most part I have been very satisfied with smail 2.5 - note that I've applied patches to extend its functionality to include mailing to programs and understand the "%" routing operator, etc. etc. I will probably go to smail 3.1.x when I install my ethernet however - I'm afraid to install zmailer since I'm told the SysV port relies on writing to /dev/kmem to implement its security features... -- ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.gts.org Uucp: ...!lsuc!becker!bdb `\o\-e "James Brown, Mark Hosler, Al Jourgenson. _< /_ Coincidence or conspiracy?" - pashdown
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<140736@becker.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!telly!robohack!becker!bdbReferences:
<1992Apr02.235346.9739@walter.uucp> <3369@ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca> <1992Apr6.132842.25227@zooid.guild.org>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!telly!robohack!becker!bdb From: bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce Becker) Newsgroups: ont.uucp Subject: Re: Pathalias question Message-ID: <140736@becker.UUCP> Date: 6 Apr 92 19:40:59 GMT References: <1992Apr02.235346.9739@walter.uucp> <3369@ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca> <1992Apr6.132842.25227@zooid.guild.org> Distribution: ont Organization: G. T. S., Toronto, Ontario Lines: 54