[qmail questions]

[Rik van Riel]

On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Balint Cristian wrote:
> 
> >	Is there an reason (legal,strategical) why qmail was not added
> >or why cant be added for future ? or too much MTAs is too much :)
> >someone want exim somewan want qmail.
> >	I think qmail is best, has a lot of plugins etc etc.
> 
> qmail license does not allow for changes to the binary and di. Red Hat
> may not patch the code and distribute it.

Two reasons why this is bad (there are probably more):

1) initscripts and other things to get qmail going must
   be shipped in a separate RPM and cannot be shipped
   in the qmail RPM since that would be a modification

2) (IIRC) standard qmail doesn't know about attachments,
   so a virus sent to "unknownuser at domain.tld" would result
   in a bounce message with the virus attached to the
   (forged) sender ... which might be illegal in some
   countries, since you'd be knowingly helping with the
   distribution of email virusses ;))
   ... please correct me if I'm wrong and this issue has
   been fixed in a recent qmail release, if there was a
   recent release

kind regards,

Rik
-- 
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan