On 07 Jun 2001 08:24:49 +0200, Tony Earnshaw wrote:
> The point is, that there are so many compile-time and personal
> extras/choices possible when rolling one's own, that this surely should
> be the choice of the dedicated MA. Or not?
If you are building for a serious mail system then you probably ought to
compile your own - just so you are aware of all the decisions and
trade-offs made in the packaging (ie you may be able to get a very few %
in performance back by turning off all the lookup types you don't use,
and by linking static). If you are just running a small mail system
then prebuilt packages are fine in general.
There is a problem with exim that there are quite a number of compile
time decisions that can be made, and building a package that supports
everything bloats things and makes the additional library set required
on a system increase which gives you a bigger maintenance problem...
The RH rpms which I am meant to be producing but I seem to have lost my
way slightly on, compromise by having a few main exim binary options -
you load the base package that excludes the exim binary and one mta
package (selections are basic - ie no database or perl support but does
have ssl since thats now a base package; then there are 3 others with
mysql, pgsql and perl in various combinations).
NB The RH package also contains eximconf. Whether their choices of
uid/gid etc were good is debatable... but they are now there as a
de-facto standard so we will be living with them :-)
Nigel.
