I would go with Postfix. It is the best mail server I've ever used. Very secure. Also very fast.
Jon On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, [ISO-8859-1] Håkon Eriksen wrote: > > > > Le 11/06/2003 11:48, « Anton Piatek » <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > > > > > On that note, i want to do the same... > > > > > > are there any easier alternatives to sendmail that are easier to set > > > up, and still reliable? > > > > You could take a look at qmail http://www.qmail.org/top.html > > > > It's not exactly "easy" to set up, but following the very clear steps > > in David Sill's "Life with Qmail" it's definitely do able. > > http://www.lifewithqmail.org/ > > The first time I did it - it took half a day. I've set up several > > now, and it usually takes about 45 minutes. > > > > Qmail is very secure. There is a standing offer from the developer to > > pay a reward to anyone who could find a security flaw - none have ever > > been found. It's also quite small and uses minimal resources, but can > > handle heavy traffic. > > (steps on to soapbox and clears throat) > > There are, however, a couple of things about qmail that makes it less > than desirable. First of all, it uses inodes on the file system as > message-IDs. This means that you can't move the directory which holds > the mail waiting to be processed (usually not a problem, but when it > bites you it really hurts), and queue-IDs will not stay unique, which > makes the log files rather difficult to read (as if they weren't cryptic > enough already(what's wrong with human-readable timestamps in log > files?)). When googling for it I found the following comparison of logs > on common MTAs, so you can see for yourselves: > <URL:http://download.logreport.org/pub/current/doc/user-manual/ch10.htm > l#id2875915> > > Second, it's composed of (IIRC) eight or nine different binaries, each > with their own configuration file and running as three or four different > users and three or four different groups. IMNSHO this makes debugging > and finding errors in your configuration more difficult that it should > have to be. Also, it takes some time to remember which config-file each > of the settings are in. > > Personally, I switched from Qmail to Exim (www.exim.org) a while ago, > and I've never really looked back. Also, the author of Exim is > helpful, friendly and pragmatic, which is not the least important > aspects of an open source-project as far as I'm concerned. > > (steps down from soapbox) > > But yes, Qmail _is_ secure. And fast. But I would never call it easy to > set up. To answer the original poster's question, there's a tool called > redhat-switchmail which makes the transition from Sendmail to Postfix > rather smooth (or so I've heard, I've never tried it myself). My > recommendation is to try that first, unless you're going to set up an > advanced and/or high-volume mail server, in which case you probably > should make some more research on what will suit you best. > > -- > - håkon > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list > -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
