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

Re: OT: why I don't want CCs

On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 09:23:40PM +0200, Thomas Krennwallner wrote:
> Hi!
> On Mon Jul 21, 2003 at 12:08:29PM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> > > And you could ignore to use mutt if you don't want to mess with a MTA.
> > > BTW, ever tried to run eximconfig with option 2? You can setup a
> > > smarthost using mailserver within 9.3 seconds (if you are fast ;-).
> > 
> > But that means:
> > a) I would have to give up using mutt, as opposed to MTA bigots,
> > ignoring built-in SMTP.
> He, if you want a reliable smtp implementation use a mta. If you want
> both you could start complaining at mutt-dev@mutt.org.

Sadly, that's probably useless, as they've already declared that SMTP in
a MUA is wrong on their homepage...

> > b) I do, but I don't want to rerun that each time I switch SMTP
> > smarthosts. And having multiple smarthosts that way doesn't seem to be
> > possible.
> The exim3 FAQ says:
> Q0326: What I'd like to do is have alternative smarthosts, where the one
> to be used is determined by which ISP I'm connected to.
> A0326: The simplest way to do this is to use a lookup in a domainlist
> router. For example:
> smarthost:
>   driver = domainlist
>   transport = remote_smtp
>   route_list = * ${lookup{smart}lsearch{/etc/smarthost}{$value}} byname
> where you arrange for the name (or IP address) of the relevant smart
> host to be placed in /etc/smarthost when you connect, in the form
> smart: smart.host.name.or.ip
> By keeping the data out of the main configuration file, you avoid having
> to HUP the daemon when it changes.

Cool, thanks for the info.

I still think it would take me less time to add SMTP support to mutt,
than to get exim working properly. If I do it properly I might even
package it as a debian package. Maybe call it SMTP mutt or Smutt for
short :)


Attachment: pgpvX2JU8pe13.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: