On Thu, 2005-02-24 at 15:02 +0100, Florian La Roche wrote: > > In that case I would be curious about the reasons which make exim more > > "right" than say postfix, otherwise it's only an "everyone wants his pet > > MTA" thing. > > The config file is more stable and the way they maintain the package > more longterm. That's what I heard. Yeah -- Phil refuses to make changes like defaulting the header_sender callout to using a _real_ reverse-path instead of the empty sender, because it would change the behaviour for existing users. It's a pain at times, but overall it makes sense. It means you can upgrade with a very good expectation that nothing will break. That reminds me -- Exim's SMTP callouts correctly use the null sender, where I believe Postfix's do not. I've had to implement a workaround for broken Postfix callouts for certain addresses which only ever _send_ mail and shouldn't receive it. -- dwmw2
