Re: Evaluating MTA's
<quote who="Jamin W.Collins">
> On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 09:22:03 -0700 (PDT)
> "nate" <debian-user@aphroland.org> wrote:
>
> And on what do you base this? Is it because there isn't a new version
> frequently?
well depends what one thinks is frequent, i would expect at least
a new rev available once a year. if development is active releaes
provide a good stable way to deploy a system without having to
add a bunch of patches before deploying.
> Such as? I've installed it very recently with no patches.
its been about a year and a half since i migrated my company
away from it, maybe patches aren't needed anymore but i remember
reading here and there that some patches were needed on some
systems to get it to build.
>
>> and is not available in binary format with debian due
>> to licensing(or something).
>
> It's available in source only, not binary only.
yeah, which is fine for people who like source only, i like
the option of being able to download binaries too.
> See:
>
> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#configuration
> http://www.lifewithqmail.org/lwq.html#start-qmail
>
> You can control the number of concurrent incoming, local, and remote
> deliveries.
thats ok, but i like load-based controls as well. the main
thing that caused loads on qmail was virus scanning, the
defaults look pretty conservative. while i didn't setup the
qmail server originally i believe the defaults were used,
and loads still got to 50 at points.
i do admit though i could not find such information when i looked
about 2 years ago, i probably was searching for the wrong
keywords.
im happy with postfix for now
nate
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: