On Sunday, September 1, 2002, at 12:25 PM, Etienne Posthumus wrote:
IMHO one of the best bits of advice is: "Don't use sendmail".
religious argument. Me, I evaluated postfix in great detail, and stayed
My favourite alternative is postfix, see www.postfix.org. It is easier
to set up,
Not really. That reputation is a holdover from the days when people
whacked .cf files directly. If you configure sendmail with m4 as you're
supposed to, they're about the same level of complexity.
maintain and use,
really? they're about the same to me. Once you configure either, well,
they just work.
and has a very good reputation for security and performance.
As does sendmail these days. the main difference is that postfix was
designed with security as a goal, while sendmail has had security
back-engineered into it. But sendmail has had every security wonk in
the universe try to crack it -- and sometimes they did, but a current
version of sendmail is not only quite secure, it's been PROVEN secure
by large hordes of people trying to prove it insecure. Postfix hasn't
had nearly that level of interest, so the real-world proof of security
In practice? I'd say they're both equivalently secure, but sendmail's
security is proven.
Postfix is a pretty good program. I'm not putting it down. But this
"sendmail sucks" mentality bothers me. It doesn't. This is no more than
the same kind of religious argument that goes on between the emacs
hackers and teh vi guys. Answer is -- they're both fine, and the rest
is a religious fight.
Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh
nervously and change the subject.
unix-porting mailing list | email@hidden
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.