Subject: Re: QMAIL VS. SENDMAIL
To: Matthew Chapman <email@example.com>
From: Todd Vierling <tv@NetBSD.ORG>
Date: 04/20/1998 10:57:36
On Mon, 20 Apr 1998, Matthew Chapman wrote:
: Not to start a flame war but I would like to know anyones opinion on
: running qmail as opposed to sendmail particularly on a Netbsd machine
: that will be running virtual hosts.?
It works. It's been tested. There are users that like it and users that
don't like it.
I'm in the latter group, mostly because qmail is a bit feature restrictive
(customized sites have to code in `C' many things available through
configuration files in other mailers). I'm also in the latter group for the
minor reason that qmail's source code is VERY difficult to read. For that
matter, so is Linux's. Doesn't Linux have indent(1)!? :)
If you choose to try out qmail, do be warned that on machines with mailing
lists with lots of recipients, that its configuration will need some tuning
to keep the lists from chewing lots of processes. qmail forks off a new
`qmail-remote' process for every recipient of every mail--something sendmail
can do with ForkEachJob--but that `feature' can have some side effects.
-- Todd Vierling (Personal firstname.lastname@example.org; Bus. email@example.com)