Re: Smail (was: qmail -- any alternatives and status of qmail)

To: Phil <witwerg@socket.net>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Smail (was: qmail -- any alternatives and status of qmail)
From: Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 17:33:13 +0000
Message-id: <[🔎] 19980717173313.A21248@earthlink.net>
Mail-followup-to: Phil <witwerg@socket.net>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 35AE10F4.6DB9@socket.net>; from Phil on Thu, Jul 16, 1998 at 09:40:52AM -0500
References: <[🔎] 35ABFB87.F1D7CDA8@socket.net> <[🔎] 19980716060535.G12903@earthlink.net> <[🔎] 35AE10F4.6DB9@socket.net>

On Thu, Jul 16, 1998 at 09:40:52AM -0500, Phil wrote:
> Joseph Carter wrote:
>   > smail is an evil piece of crap.
> 
> So your equating it with win95? ;-)

Windoze is an evil piece of very-non-free.

Attachment: pgp3kcEDW7v1u.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to:

References:
- Smail (was: qmail -- any alternatives and status of qmail)
  - From: Witwerg the Sage <witwerg@socket.net>
- Re: Smail (was: qmail -- any alternatives and status of qmail)
  - From: Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@earthlink.net>
- Re: Smail (was: qmail -- any alternatives and status of qmail)
  - From: Phil <witwerg@socket.net>

Prev by Date: Re: Debian i386 freeze
Next by Date: Re: Debian i386 freeze
Previous by thread: Re: Smail (was: qmail -- any alternatives and status of qmail)
Next by thread: Re: Smail (was: qmail -- any alternatives and status of qmail)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread