Re: FW: Re: [Exim] Exim on a single-user system

Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: dman
Date:  
To: exim-users
Subject: Re: FW: Re: [Exim] Exim on a single-user system
On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 02:35:23AM +0200, Vadim Vygonets wrote:
| Quoth Matthew Byng-Maddick on Wed, Jan 02, 2002:
| > On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 09:45:56AM -0500, Derek Broughton wrote:
| > > Right. Similarly fetchmail prefers to deliver to port 25 than to
| > > sendmail. I wonder if it's an assumption that the SMTP server is a
| > > standalone daemon and therefore has no startup overhead? Of course, not
| > > necessarily a valid assumption.

|
| Hmm.

|
| : narn:~%4; size /SBIN/exim
| text    data    bss     dec     hex
| 415874  14300   7040    437214  6abde   /SBIN/exim

|
| I'd say that loading 14K of data[0] off the disk doesn't take
| much more time than making DNS lookups and whatnot.


Sounds good to me.

| > Fetchmail is a pile of crap, because it often loses mail, due to this. It
| > ignores any error return codes in delivering the message, but happily
| > deletes it from the pop/imap server anyway.

|
| Agreed, and I've seen it happen. Mail should NEVER be lost.
| Unless it's an undeliverable bounce message, or is explicitly
| blackholed, that is. What I mean is: mail from a real human to a
| real human should NEVER be lost.


Right.

| I heard that getmail is a good program that does things right.


Or tell fetchmail to pipe to exim, the way it ought to.

| > This is a good reason for NOT using SMTP delivery, IMO.

|
| Or implementing it correctly, including some sort of queue.


This sounds like the easiest way is to embed exim inside of Outlook
<grin>. I don't think you'll call that reasonable :-).

-D

--

If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just and will forgive us our
sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
        I John 1:9