On 3/25/2005 19:32, "Terry Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I suspect that Mailman 2.x to 3.x will not be that rough. Yes, the
>
> Hi again,
> Just out of interest, on Postfix, there is a simple option to
> upgrade a running system like so (as most here will know):
>
> make
> stop postfix
>
On 3/25/2005 19:05, "Brad Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 6:31 PM -0800 2005-03-25, John W. Baxter wrote:
>
>> But at any rate, Exim 3 to ?? Is a very good opportunity to consider Postfix
>> rather than Exim 4 as the ??. Mailman 2.x to 3.0 will likely present a
>> similar opportunity
I suspect that Mailman 2.x to 3.x will not be that rough. Yes, the
Hi again,
Just out of interest, on Postfix, there is a simple option to
upgrade a running system like so (as most here will know):
make
stop postfix
make upgrade
start postfix
I have never had to upgrade Mailman, as I started
At 6:31 PM -0800 2005-03-25, John W. Baxter wrote:
But at any rate, Exim 3 to ?? Is a very good opportunity to consider Postfix
rather than Exim 4 as the ??. Mailman 2.x to 3.0 will likely present a
similar opportunity to look around at what else there is.
I suspect that Mailman 2.x to 3.x wil
At 6:21 PM -0800 2005-03-25, John W. Baxter wrote:
Unless softupdates "sees" power outages and hustles the data onto disk
(which is probably feasible) it would not be considered MTA-suitable (and
Exim does what it can to prevent it, using whatever force to disk calls are
available to it).
The
On 3/25/2005 17:12, "Brad Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This whole Exim 3/Exim 4 thing is not a problem with postfix.
> Don't get me wrong, postfix isn't perfect. But what flaws it has
> tend to be less visible than this, and the issue of upgrading from
> one version to another usually ha
On 3/25/2005 16:37, "Brad Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In this situation, *BSD with softupdates will be your best bet on
> the filesystem side. The cool thing about softupdates is that it
> re-orders the disk I/O operations in a safe manner, and if the file
> is created and goes away qui
On Mar 26, 2005, at 10:12, Brad Knowles wrote:
At 4:02 PM -0800 2005-03-25, John W. Baxter wrote:
And I have no way to help them. I could probably manage to
configure the
old Exim to work with the new Mailman, but I have no interest in
doing so.
Therein lies a big part of the problem. If you
At 4:02 PM -0800 2005-03-25, John W. Baxter wrote:
And I have no way to help them. I could probably manage to configure the
old Exim to work with the new Mailman, but I have no interest in doing so.
Therein lies a big part of the problem. If you're not willing to
help, and the rest of the Exi
At 2:25 PM -0800 2005-03-25, Heather Madrone wrote:
FreeBSD works great if you don't need a keyboard, a mouse, or a monitor.
They are oriented towards the serial console at the moment, but
I'm sure that the rest will come along. I've got four UltraSPARC 10
clones that I plan on using under Fre
On 3/25/2005 14:14, "Brad Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Debian woody notwithstanding, no one should be installing and running Exim 3
>> these days. There is essentially no one readily available (eg, on the
>> exim-users mailing list) who remembers much about it.
>
> Think someone who
At 1:48 PM -0800 2005-03-25, John W. Baxter wrote:
Debian woody notwithstanding, no one should be installing and running Exim 3
these days. There is essentially no one readily available (eg, on the
exim-users mailing list) who remembers much about it.
Think someone who already has Exim 3 on th
On 3/25/2005 14:25, "Heather Madrone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As I said, I've never tried Postfix, so my only point of comparison is
> sendmail. I am fairly confident that any MTA would look simple and
> friendly next to sendmail.
You probably shouldn't say "any" in that context. Exchange
Thanks for your detailed answer, Brad. I appreciate your
opinion on this subject. If Postfix will do a better job than
exim, I don't mind switching at all.
At 10:08 PM +0100 3/25/05, Brad Knowles wrote:
> In terms of providing good support for UltraSPARC, Solaris is
>going to be best, and
On 3/25/2005 13:08, "Brad Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you've got Exim 3.x and you want to use Mailman 2.1.x,
> you're screwed.
Debian woody notwithstanding, no one should be installing and running Exim 3
these days. There is essentially no one readily available (eg, on the
exim-user
At 11:55 AM -0800 2005-03-25, Heather Madrone wrote:
The OSX setup, however, is only a stopgap while I get my permanent
server set up. I've been looking for an open source operating system
that will run well on our Ultra 5 (sparc). We were going with Debian,
which then announced that it's dro
I've been using Mailman with exim on Mac OSX. I started with
sendmail (because it comes with OSX and I'm somewhat familiar
with it), but soon got tired of having to wrestle it into submission
all the time and switched to exim. I've been very pleased with exim's
performance and integration with Ma
17 matches
Mail list logo
