From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 29 22:42:53 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC9B2106566C for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:42:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rsk@gsp.org) Received: from taos.firemountain.net (taos.firemountain.net [207.114.3.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84D358FC08 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:42:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from squonk.gsp.org (bltmd-207.114.17.122.dsl.charm.net [207.114.17.122]) by taos.firemountain.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id n9TM3nGH024336 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:03:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from avatar.gsp.org (avatar.gsp.org [192.168.0.11]) by squonk.gsp.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id n9TM1Sbt029934 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:01:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from avatar.gsp.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by avatar.gsp.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-4) with ESMTP id n9TM3ilS023470 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:03:44 -0400 Received: (from rsk@localhost) by avatar.gsp.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n9TM3hxI023469 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:03:43 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:03:43 -0400 From: Rich Kulawiec To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20091029220343.GA23027@gsp.org> References: <4AE5F897.3000103@rawbw.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AE5F897.3000103@rawbw.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Subject: Re: Why is sendmail is part of the system and not a package? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:42:53 -0000 Having used sendmail since (quite nearly) the day it was released, and having also spent considerable time with postfix, exim, etc. in a variety of environments both small and quite large, I think I'm in a position to address this. Sendmail remains one of the best choices for an MTA. It's quite easy to configure for nearly all installations -- I would say that over the many I've done, most of those required only a few lines of changes to one of the m4 files to produce a fully-working configuration. It has an excellent feature set. It's maintained by some of the most experienced MTA people on this planet and while I don't agree with all of their design or implementation choices, I've learned to respect their judgment. It's readily configurable and customizable for some quite demanding and/or esoteric environments. It's documented exhaustively and considerable expertise abounds. It integrates well with just about everything, from webmail frontends to POP/IMAP servers to mailing list management software like Mailman. I see no reason at this time to change to another (default) MTA. Which is not to say that everyone should run the default MTA: some installations may require features which sendmail doesn't offer and can't be handled by milters. But in those cases -- where another MTA is required -- I expect the implementor to have the expertise to effect this change. ---Rsk