Re: [Evolution] MTA/MDA/Mail clients

(Sorry about the tardy reply)

On Fri, 2004-01-16 at 05:33, Tony Earnshaw wrote: 
tor, 15.01.2004 kl. 17.18 skrev pkm:

I do have one comment regarding the whole mail sending/retrieval
strategy. I don't understand why evolution (and many other mail clients)
try to take on the role of the MTA. fetchmail and many sendmail clones
have been around for quite some time, and work well when configured

There's no such thing as a Sendmail clone, luckily. There are several
MTA dropins that use a surrogate sendmail binary; I use Exim 4 and
Postfix 2, which can both be called as 'sendmail'. But both are utterly
different to configure and don't have many of Sendmail's disadvantages.

Regarding using "sendmail", I never meant that I wanted to use the crappy
old sendmail, I mean <quote>sendmail</quote>; whichever one you use (I use

 I am a little dissappointed that I can not have fetchmail run
when I press the 'Send/Receive' button, or have any control over the
options passed to sendmail.

Why use fetchmail at all? It's an MTA utility (a bit like an artificial
limb, actually), not an MUA utility and Evo doesn't need it...

One of my key goals for email management (and I don't think I'm in the
minority here) is to separate which app is doing what. I don't want to
depend on having an X display with evolution running in order to check my
email. I often ssh in and check my mbox's with mutt. I'd say this justifies
having fetchmail and whichever sendmail variant I use. It all has to do
with separating the mail reading/writing apps from the mail
getting/sending apps so that I can read/write email remotely.

 As to any
"options passed to sendmail", I fear you're getting things mixed up. Evo
uses smtp as originally defined in rfcs 821 and 822 - and since extended
and improved with myriads of other rfcs, to most of which Evo adheres
far better than do many other clients.

Which ones of the 'myriads' is it adhering to, and you're assuming too much
of my ISP.

Passing options to Sendmail has
nothing to do with smtp - why should everybody use Sendmail anyway? I

You can't tell me that there you never use command line options and actually
have a working *nix box. And I'm not telling everyone to use 'sendmail', it
sounds more like you're telling everyone to use evo.

smtp deals transparently with *every* rfc-compliant MTA.
And if my ISP's MTA isn't rcf-compliant (M$ Exchange)? What then?

On Fri, 2004-01-16 at 04:14, David Woodhouse wrote: 
On Fri, 2004-01-16 at 09:43 +0100, Ludek Safar wrote:
That's such a true. We're fighting to spread Linux as wide as possible
and unfortunately most of potential end users are just scared about
these things. I'm not telling it's OK, it's just a fact.

More to the point, it doesn't _have_ to be a problem. Those of us who
_are_ aware that an MUA has no business trying to filter or spam-check
incoming mail don't _have_ to use these 'features'. 

You can do spam checking and filtering into separate folders at delivery
time as $DEITY intended, and Evolution will be quite happy with that

I totally agree with you, *nix needs to be more user friendly, and those
who 'know better'/'know how' can use the particular 'MTA Utility'. My
primary point is that these functions have already been coded by someone
else at some point, and I just don't see the logic in having developers
spend their valuable time re-inventing the wheel just to make it look a
bit better. I think it'd be great if I could configure
procmail/spamassassin from a nice looking settings gui like the one
evolution has.

-Pete =)

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]