[Gllug] I found this link

[Bruce Richardson]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 02:24:12AM +0000, Mike Brodbelt wrote:
> Bruce Richardson wrote:
> 
> Simpler to configure, perhaps (though with m4, I think there's an
> argument there), but where does your speed argument come from? Sendmail
> has seen a lot more optimisation over the years than the others, and
> I've not seen any good tests....

Personal experience and the reports of fellow mailing-list subscribers -
not the most scientific statistics but enough corroboration for me.
Doesn't apply across the board - there are some things sendmail can do
that other mtas can only reproduce with some hackwork and sending
messages through several pipes/transports.  OTOH I have seen the
difference between sendmail and postfix clearing a large backlog on a
heavily subscribed mailing list and postfix was dramatically better.

> 
> > Sendmail is simply much more complex than is needed in 99.9% of
> > situations.  
> 
> However, configuring it with m4 instead of hand hacking your cf file
> avoids 99% of the complexity, and allows you to set it up pretty easily.
> I haven't had to hand hack the cf in ages, and I've done a fair few
> installs.

The m4 file gives less control, IMO, than the config files of exim or
postfix.  Sendmail is more configurable but you do need to be hacking
the cf file to do that.  I see a qualitative difference between
discussions of the mtas on ngs or mailing lists.  With Sendmail it goes
"What hacks did you add to the m4 file?  Oh, well, that *looks* right".
The conversations about exim or postfix in the same venues show that
people understand more of what they are doing: they aren't working at
one remove from the config file.  The structure of the respective mail
systems is readily understandable from those same config files.

The first time I encountered Exim it was on a system set up by someone
else and I needed to work out why messages sent to an alias weren't
running the corresponding command.  The structure of the Exim system is
so cleary laid out in the config file that it only took a few minutes to
correct.  With Sendmail I'd likely have had an afternoon with the old
Bat book to look forward to.

I've said that Sendmail does more.  But I generally use the smallest
practical hammer to crack any particular nut and I firmly believe in
knowing as much as you can about the tools you use regularly.  Many
people who get sendmail configured (because it was the default or
because they have heard of it) have no idea what the m4 hacks do.  IMO
most of them do not need the complexity of sendmail and are better off
with one of the simpler mtas.  Less to learn for the same results.

-- 
Bruce

It is impolite to tell a man who is carrying you on his shoulders that
his head smells.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 261 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/gllug/attachments/20010926/56cb164f/attachment.pgp>