Solved: Sendmail question. Problem with yahoo.

[Paul Lussier]

"Steven W. Orr" <steveo at syslang.net> writes:

> On Sunday, Apr 13th 2008 at 08:13 -0000, quoth Ben Scott:
>
> Why would you ever want to do that? Sendmail has more flexibility. 

This has been answered, however, I just wanted to add my .02 drachma:

Just because something has more flexibility is not necessarilly a
reason for choosing it over something less flexible.  The majority of
vehicles on the road are cars, yet both pickup trucks and
tractor/trailers are more flexible.

With great flexibility comes great complexity.  99.999% of the
flexibility in sendmail is unnecessary for %99.999 of the sites
requiring the suse of an MTA.  I don't, nor do most people I know,
need the ability to gateway between the Internet, ARPANet, or UUCP.

Postfix has, as far as I know, a good majority of the flexibility of
sendmail at a fraction of the cost in terms of readability and
maintainability.

Sendmail is still (and probably will be for as long as Eric Allman is
alive/maintaining it) the work-horse of the internet.  If I need speed
and throughput, I'd still choose sendmail.  If I need massive
scalability, I'll choose sendmail.  If I need to deal with wacky and
bizarre, I'll probably choose sendmail.

If I need simplicity, readability, ease of maintenance, and basic
configuration, I'll go with Postfix.

I know them both equally as well (which is to say, neither as well as
I ought to, both farm more than want to), and in general, I prefer
postfix.

There, I think that's about .04 drachma :)
-- 
Seeya,
Paul