[NTLUG:Discuss] MTA's

[Brian]

I can't give you a comparison between qmail and exim, but I can tell you I've been
running qmail on a number of different platforms for a couple of years now, and have
no plans on going to another MTA.  Some qmail plusses:  Configuration is done
through centralized config files; documentation is good and plentiful; qmail is
robust and secure; and tcpwrapper/daemontools are awesome.  Some negatives:  Many of
the people on the qmail mailing lists are arrogant assholes; there are some RFC
issues that DJB refuses to address (he's pretty arrogant as well); and the learning
curve is a little steep due to the complexity of the delivery mechanism.

If I had it to do over, though, I'd try both and simply pick the one I liked best.

  --Brian

On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 09:48:33AM -0500, chris.gamble at CPBINC.com wrote:
> I have been looking around, mostly due to frustration with sendmail's config
> files, and have located a few other MTA agents (qmail and exim). Per the web
> pages for each of these, each seems to have strengths and advantages over
> the other. Does anyone know if there is a comparison chart of the features /
> advantages / disadvantages of each of these MTA's ?
> 
> *note: due to fear from what I have seen on newsgroups, I did not mention
> discussing the differences :)
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> _______________________________________________
> https://ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://ntlug.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20020828/044b38fd/attachment.bin