Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: discussion: October 2001:
[aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server

[aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: discussion@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aclug-L] Re: Virtual POP3 and IMAP server
From: Carl D Cravens <raven@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 10:42:05 -0500 (CDT)
Reply-to: discussion@xxxxxxxxx

On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Ryan Hunt wrote:

> The messages are fine.. here is an example...
> ----
> Hi. This is the qmail-send program at
> I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
> This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
> <aclugtest@xxxxxxxx>:
> Sorry, no mailbox here by that name. vpopmail (#5.1.1)
> ---

"Just fine" means the mail server doesn't talk to me like it's a real
person, for one thing.  A server doesn't freakin' *apologize* to me.

For another thing, as an admin for several mailing lists, not all qmail
versions send out useful info...  i.e. there's no technical reason given
for "giving up".

When a reason for the failure *is* given, it's difficult to parse it
programmatically.  My wife has written a parser to handle auto-unsubbing,
and qmail has given her more trouble than most, in part because it tries
to be "friendly" and doesn't clearly delimit the error message.

So, no... qmail's bounce messages are not "just fine".  They're annoying,
inefficient, and at least in the past, often plain useless.

> Security. qmail doesn't let intruders into your machine. ( visit
> )

Sendmail's never let an intruder into my machine either.

> Reliability. qmail never loses mail.

Sendmail's very reliable about not losing mail in my experience.  I've
counted on this ability often.

> User-controlled mailing lists. Users don't have to pester the system
> administrator to create new lists.

As in majordomo-style lists, where the subscriber can control his own
subscription?  Or just owner-controlled distribution lists that any user
could do with his own email client?

> Straightforward administration. qmail works with a minimum of fuss.

I thought it was very difficult to configure.

> Flexible program deliveries. qmail provides a powerful interface for
> external mail processors.

What's "powerful" about it?  Sendmail seems to do alright with delivery
agents and piping messages to programs.  How do you get more "powerful"
than passing a message off to another program?

> The maildir format. This feature makes it easy to set up high-volume
> distributed POP toasters.

Maildir sounds nifty, but I use Pine to directly access my mailbox... I
dunno if it handles Maildir (it may), but I often count on all my messages
being in a single file because I look at them with command line utilities.
I often pop into my mail archive folder and grep through the files to
locate old messages, and I use rotatelogs to expire out old message
archives.  And I only have two POP users, so mbox format works fine for

Carl D Cravens (raven@xxxxxxxxxxx)
BASIC programmers never die, they GOSUB without RETURN.

-- This is the discussion@xxxxxxxxx list.  To unsubscribe,

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]