On Jun 14, Mark Baker wrote > > In article <[🔎] 19970614130252.11815@lotte.sax.de>, > Heiko Schlittermann <heiko@lotte.sax.de> writes: > > >: It might be good if we would replace smail in hamm with exim. Exim should > >: be the standard mailer for hamm: > > > > ... hmmm, ``never change a running system'', and smail _is_ running. > > No-one's suggesting changing running systems. We're suggesting that future > installs of debian should use exim instead of smail. Currently both are in > debian and both work well, but smail is the default one, it's only the > default that will be changed. To make this clearer, the only thing that would happen it that exim would be marked with priority 'important' and smail with priority 'extra'.. And yes, I think it'd be a good idea, assuming that exim's .forward syntax is backward-compatible with sendmail/smail's syntax. Christian
Attachment:
pgpf0jNcx_mZX.pgp
Description: PGP signature