On 2008-11-10, frantisek holop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 3. there is a wonderful alternative with a security > record matched only by openbsd by a religiosly > respected security researcher (so it is really > not the case of "all the alternatives are bloated > pieces of shit" like xntpd/snmpd/quagga etc)
> or is this just about the license? section 4 of the IBM Public License is not too friendly. > esp with the bar being as high as postfix... look at it from the point of view of someone who has OpenBSD running on a laptop and just wants to relay via a colo box or their ISP's smarthost using SMTP auth...
