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