Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!brl-adm!rutgers!princeton!allegra!rayssd!gmp From: gmp@rayssd.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.mail.headers Subject: Re: I hate smail Message-ID: <532@rayssd.RAY.COM> Date: Wed, 7-Jan-87 21:22:48 EST Article-I.D.: rayssd.532 Posted: Wed Jan 7 21:22:48 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 8-Jan-87 18:44:34 EST References: <14227@amdcad.UUCP> Sender: gmp@rayssd.RAY.COM (Gregory M. Paris @ Raytheon Company, Portsmouth RI) Reply-To: gmp@rayssd.RAY.COM (Gregory M. Paris) Organization: Raytheon Company, Portsmouth RI Lines: 22 Summary: Smail works fine for us... In article <14227@amdcad.UUCP> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes: > I hate smail. I don't think too highly of the people that unleashed it > on us either. This system works worse than PC-DOS. I hate it. Maybe > the authors are trying to teach me I get what I pay for. Unreliable > software. Hmm. That seems quite odd. We've been using smail here, and I've been more than happy with it. About the only real problem there might be with it isn't really a problem with smail, and that is that smail interprets From: addresses properly, whilst many sites do the improper thing by prepending their hostname onto the From: address, the result being an improper address. This makes replies a somewhat iffy proposition, though that was true before smail came along. I believe that the UUCP-Project is still working on improving smail, so if you have some specific suggestions, why don't you spell them out? -- Greg Paris ....................... gmp@rayssd.RAY.COM {cbosgd,gatech,ihnp4,linus,mirror,uiucdcs}!rayssd!gmp ... Everything seems to be up in the air at this time ................ I need something to change your mind