El vie, 29-06-2007 a las 18:15 +0200, Sandy Drobic escribió:
Hudibras wrote:
El vie, 29-06-2007 a las 15:06 +0200, Sandy Drobic escribió:
Hudibras wrote:
What problem are you trying to solve? If the question is "can Postfix do that?" the answer is "yes, it can, and a lot more, too". If the question is "Which MTA should I use?" The answer is "Use the one you are able to administer and debug.". I do prefer, no doubt about it, qmail. Check www.shupp.org, and install in a twinkle the best mail server (imho, of course). And after, enjoy with a master piece of software. What features were the deciding factor for you to choose Qmail? I don't have any experience with Qmail myself, I chose Postfix because it has a great support community, a very active development and the documentation is extensive and accurate. Features like DSN and Policy Server/Milters also became very important.
Do as you like. It's only my advice.
But after many years testing nearly every mail server, I don't change qmail for anything in this world. It's simply a master piece of software. People who knows me also know my opinion about qmail, and I think this way from 1998-1999, when I tested the first time.
It's great that you like Qmail, but this doesn't give my any information to compare it to Postfix.
I've no time (maybe several hours...) to explain each other capabilities. But this is not the forum to that. I only said if you would like a great (the best one, imho) MTA, qmail would be the first to begin with.
Ideally it would be great if someone had worked with both programs and could compare how much effort it took to reach the same result.
i've worked with both and more programs, as I said before.
The first (beta) version of Postfix was released 1999, the first stable release 1.0 appeared 2001, so I guess you didn't test Postfix at that time.
Well, I've said I began to test MTAs in 1998-1999, but I refered to it in general, not considering Postfix o Exaim or Sendmail dates of release. That is not important. I assure you I have used Postfix and I missed mails, because of smtp deliveries if some cases. However that thing never happened with qmail, independently the type of delivery, domain existance or not, etc.
All features you like in a mail server, qmail does have them. So, why don't you try and if not of your taste, install any other. I can assure you my qmail is really the same I've got from 2002. And I sleep peacefully while qmail works. That's not good, I know, but if you don't want be ever watching a mail server, install qmail and forget yourself.
I have heard the same being said about Postfix. I still wonder how anyone can just install a mailserver and then forget about it. I am always finetuning the configuration to adapt to new spammer tricks. agreed, it would probably work without finetuning, but the rate of rejected spam would probably drop a lot.
Of course. Postfix is a very very good MTA. I agree with you. But... qmail is better. It's completely modular, and... several of today Postfix capabilities are "copied" from qmail, like Maildir boxes... and more.
A big German ISP tested this, they simply stopped finetuning their configuration and noticed a considerable drop in their rejection rate.
I've heard more things like this about qmail... So, that's not important to me. For instance, several of the most important Domain Registration Servers use qmail! I hope you know what I mean (my English is not as good as my mother tongue).
If I had to choose another MTA other than Postfix I would probably switch to Exim.
Postfix and Exim are two great mail servers, but I still do prefer qmail, because (and it's only my opinion) is much better in most cases. qmail version is the same from 1998, and it does not need any more; but there are many people around helping and making "add-ons", making it more powerful and never, never, never has a security hole or anything like these. However, sendmail or postfix really have holes... or is that not true?
At least for Postfix it is not true.
Yes. I saw time ago a severe security fix for Postfix... qmail doesn't have ANY ONE.
Sendmail had some problems with security some years ago. In the last years I they tightened their code a lot. Though I do remember that Sendmail had a remote exploitable bug last year.
Yes. Sendmail is already history...
One good hint how secure Postfix is: Borderware has chosen Postfix as the MTA of their Firewall.
Ok. I'm pleased for that. Sorry, but I don't know Borderware, so, it's not a very relevant notice.
So decide and have a try qmail, and you'll not be disappointed.
So far, this does not yet give me enough encouragement to invest the many month of work to dig into Qmail as I did with Postfix. Before I change I have to know if the annoyances in Postfix are worth dealing with the annoyances of another MTA. Every piece of software has some drawbacks, the question is rather if I am willing to live with it or if I can circumvent the annoyance.
Sorry. It's your choice.
Since I know Postfix quite well, so I know how to work around the annoyances of Postfix, but that is not the case with Qmail (or Exim or Sendmail).
Really. But this happens to everything.
Recipient validation for example is very important, how and at what stage of the smtp dialogue is it done in Qmail? I would probably have to spend quite some hours to find the anwser. Time is expensive, I only have a limited supply of it. (^-^)
All right. Cheers, Alejandro.
-- Sandy
List replies only please! Please address PMs to: news-reply2 (@) japantest (.) homelinux (.) com
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org