Hi,
* Adam Funk (adam00f@???) [050928 16:29]:
> On Wednesday 28 September 2005 14:23, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Why should I when the program has to handle failure anyway? The
> > argument always seems to be "The MTA can handle failures." OK, and
> > when the MTA fails what, the program sending mail is just supposed to
> > route it to /dev/null? Even mutt, the current MUA de jour of the
> > die-hard unixeistas has it's own primative queuing in place in case of
> > MTA failure.
>
> Every MUA I've seen has an "outbox" where mail sits until it can be SMTP'd
> away. Is that what you mean by primitive queueing?
I can't remember that mutt has such an feature. Also programs like mail
usually don't have that, but just give back an error ...
Cheers,
Andi
