[linux-elitists] MTA roundup
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
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
> 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?
More information about the linux-elitists