From: david@dynamix.com (David L Jarvis)
Subject: Re: Mailer replacement for Xenix
Organization:  SOFTWARE / DYNAMIX
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 6:55:42 EDT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA02177; Mon, 14 Sep 92 10:28:48 -0700
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA09320; Mon, 14 Sep 92 05:29:46 -0700
X-Received: from dynamix.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet)id AA07976; Mon, 14 Sep 92 08:25:40 -0400
X-Received: by dynamix.com (smail2.5c)id AA28172; 14 Sep 92 06:55:42 EDT (Mon)
X-To: comp.unix.xenix.sco.usenet (comp.unix.xenix.sco)
X-In-Reply-To: <BuHxy5.24r@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us>; from "Marc Unangst" at Sep 13, 92 3:05 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]

> >If you had problems (as I did with my first attempt), 
> >they were no doubt the result of one of two things:  
> >1) not reading the included doc thoroughly enough, and 
> >2) a lack of experience and knowledge about *nix mailing systems ... 
> 
> Maybe they've improved the install instructions lately; I know that
> the last time I tried hacking a third-party mailer into SCO Xenix, I
> wound up doing a lot of trial-and-error research.  Most of this
> research involved replacing various likely-looking programs with a
> shell script that did an "echo $*", and then trying to send some mail.
> This qualifies as "a lot of trouble" in my book.

My entire "Xenix Replacement Mailer" discussion has been 
centered on Smail & Elm, since thats all I've ever had need to use.  
(but I just saw yet another post refuting your claims talking 
about "mmdf and mh")   I can't say whether or not Smail 2.5 has had 
it's install instructions updated lately.  (but I highly doubt it, you
never do indicate exactly *which* "third-party" mailer you are talking
about that you had so much trouble with)
My first install was about 1.5 years ago, and it was as
quick and simple as I could have ever hoped for.  The *ONLY* tricky part
came in the configuration (compile and install were cake), and that was
because of my lack of familiarity with Smail & various mailer questions.
So far, I haven't seen ONE SINGLE person in this group complain about
installing a better mailer like you have.  Why is that???

> And all the experience and knowledge about *nix mailers in the world
> won't help you get smail installed on Xenix, because the Xenix mail
> system is unlike any other *nix mailer in the world (including the SCO
> Unix mail system).  This is yet another instance of my standards
> argument.

Standards?  So mail is mail on any Unix system???   Right ...
My point was that had I been more experienced with the network, email,
mailers, uucp, Smail, or whatever, the few questions I had when setting up
Smail/Elm  wouldn't have arisen ... GETTING EMAIL GOING ON XENIX IS *NOT* A
DIFFICULT PROCESS  (so far there's been quite a few ppl to support this
stance and NOT A SINGLE ONE to support yours, sorta makes ya think don't
it?)


#----------------------------------------------------------------------#
#          David L. Jarvis                 SOFTWARE  /                 #
#          david@dynamix.com                       /  DYNAMIX          #
#----------------------------------------------------------------------#
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix.sco