Le samedi 30 octobre 2004 Ã 12:53 -0700, Per Bjornsson a Ãcrit : > On Sat, 2004-10-30 at 04:52, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le samedi 30 octobre 2004 Ã 13:59 +0300, Mircea MITU a Ãcrit : > > > To exclude Sendmail, it would be stupid, but making Postfix the default > > > MTA it would be a smart move. > > > > Unfortunately at this point if would not only be a smart move but a long > > overdue one. I hope it's not one of those cases where Novell/Suse did it > > first so RH won't even contemplate it. > > Gee, having fun with the conspiracy theories? ;) If this was the case, > why would Red Hat package Postfix at all? Likely it's just that there > isn't really any consensus on this, Tss gcc 2.96, apache 2, xinetd... RH is usually not so timid dumping yesterday's everyone-uses-it tech (in fact users have been more known to complain about RH fondness for new stuff that "breaks" Linux as-they-know-it than the reverse) I'm stiff ROTFL remembering the last time the MTA question was raised and the argument was sendmail sucks, postfix and exim are better, but since we can't agree if we like postfix or exim best, sendmail stays the default. (this being said if I didn't thought RH makes more good decisions than bad ones, I wouldn't be on this list) Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
