[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: default MTA for sarge



On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 04:04:14PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mer 16/07/2003 ? 15:44, Craig Sanders a ?crit :
> 
> > huh?  what relationship does that mini-rant have to what you quoted?
> > 
> > somebody wanted to know if postfix had default configuration values (it
> > does, as most things do).  i answered his question, plus i told him about
> > some commands for seeing various views of the postfix config...BTW, the
> > ability to easily see/extract JUST the non-default settings is extremely
> > useful for problem solving.  it eliminates the "noise" (default stuff),
> > showing you only the "signal" (what you've changed).
> > 
> > how do you get from that to whatever it is that you're ranting about?
> 
> Don't play with words. You're presenting as a useful configuration tool what
> is just a workaround for a bad design.

you really don't have a clue what you're talking about, do you?

having default values is "bad design"?  yeah, sure.

having a tool that can easily show you where your configuration diverges from
default is "just a workaround for bad design"?  right on, genius.

i hope nobody's paying you good money for systems administration work.


> Anyway, your religious tone 

do you always have a problem confusing authoritative information with religion?
perhaps you should seek medical help for that.

(that'll be 3 Hail Marys and a good flogging for this advice.)

> when it comes to this stupid exim bashing

i've hardly bashed exim at all.  

there are many things i could have said about it that i haven't because it's
just not worth turning this into a is-so/is-not flame war.    most people in
this thread are actually debating the features/issues rather than descending to
personal attacks.  if you try hard, you might learn some useful social skills
from them.  if not, then well...what can i say...people like you exist to
attract flames.

i've concentrated mostly on pointing out postfix's advantages instead or
answering questions about it (this reply to you not included, obviously).

> just triggers the same reactions a Gentoo kiddie does. Those who don't plonk
> you will try to match your level of untruthfulness.

i really wish they would *match* my "level of untruthfulness" rather than
greatly exceed it, then there would be nothing but well-informed accurate
information in this thread.

craig



Reply to: