[linux-elitists] MTA roundup

Andrew L33tsmith akohlsmith-le@benshaw.com
Mon Apr 29 18:55:04 PDT 2002


> > Stock qmail, is secure, sure -- but what about
> > patched-to-make-it-work-with-your-other-software qmail?

I dunno, I use qmail + vpopmail + about half a dozen very small (and easy to 
verify) patches + rav's qmail-queue and haven't run across anything screwey 
happen.

Now of course the whole point of DJB's license is that you can't release a 
version with all of this applied already.  It's unfortunate but I've got it 
down to one combined patch and I have an internal package I use for my mail 
servers.  Good enough for me, and qmail is a really good piece of software; 
too bad it's ugly.  I'll take ugly and functional for server software any 
day, though.  Just don't ask me to install djbdns or svc. <shudders>

> I've also wondered how many Linux-using qmail fans are aware of Dan's
> warning that all Linux filesystems must be mounted with the "sync"
> option?  http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/reliability.html#filesystems

I don't take all of Dan's postings to heart.  He's a pure academic and as such 
his world is full of perfect situations.  I use qmail with ext2/ext3 with 
noatime and async.  I've got the systems on a UPS and they'll shut down nice 
if something happens to system power.  I've yet to have a kernel/system crash 
on a production machine so, to me, all of his hand waving about sync writes 
and so on are just that: hand waving.

> For that matter, he disapproves of not using "sync" on *BSD and
> elsewhere, too.  _And_ warns against journaling filesystems and
> softupdates.
> No, he wants you to _only_ use FFS/UFS with softupdates and async omitted.

I didn't see either of these mentioned in the link.  Is that elsewhere?

Regards,
Andrew




More information about the linux-elitists mailing list