Dnia 06-02-2007, wto o godzinie 22:47 +0000, David Woodhouse napisał(a): > Yet you don't seem to be able to _specify_ one which we might actually > want to run; one which provides functionality that Exim can't already > manage for itself. A proprietary milter speaking proprietary protocol with some proprietary daemon (I know I've seen some anti-virus solutions using milter, probably there are some anti-spam commercial systems as well). > Are you able to do the same, to back up your claim that sendmail can do > real things that Exim cannot? I think we've conceded UUCP already, > without much regret. Got anything we might care about? We, the Sendmail users, are so happy with our MTA that we've never tried to really use Exim. I myself experimented with Exim few years ago, but I couldn't make it accept mail for wildcard domain (user@*.somewhere.com). Probably an easy thing if you know its language, but it was so much easier to just use Sendmail. I can't really tell if Exim can't do this (actually, I guess it can), so there's no real point in arguing with you that it can't. The problem here is that in order to really compare two advanced programs, you have to become an expert in both, which doesn't make sense (unless comparing the two programs is your job or religion :)). By the way, does anyone know, which MTA will be the default for RHEL 5? Lam
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: To jest =?UTF-8?Q?cz=C4=99=C5=9B=C4=87?= listu podpisana cyfrowo
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
