Re: [fetchmail-users] Re: fetchmail/qmail/-scanner/SpamAss. integration

[Matthias A. <mat...@gm...>]

"Rob MacGregor" <rob...@gm...> writes:

> On 5/3/06, Rob Funk <rf...@fu...> wrote:
>> While I am no fan of qmail either, I would argue that by at least two
>> standards it is a "modern MTA":
>> - it does not use a monolithic architecture, using separate programs for
>> separate tasks
>> - it uses maildir to store mail, rather than mbox
>>   (OK, this one isn't technically an MTA issue, but an MDA issue)
>>
>> I'm still amazed at the number of people still using sendmail....
>
> Which also doesn't use a monolitic architecture (ok, so it's only 2
> daemons, but it's a step in the right direction) or maildir...

Ah well, if you want Maildir underneath sendmail, you can always install
maildrop and use it as filter application or mailer. At least sendmail
is actively maintained so its security holes get plugged in reasonable
time. qmail's holes are open for like eight years now...

For a change of subject, the best MTA is fetchmail, of course. =:->

> Now, can we stop this evangelising over the best/worst choice of MTA :-)

Agreed. And cows can't tile a roof. :-)

-- 
Matthias Andree