From: david@dynamix.com (David L Jarvis)
Subject: Re: Mailer replacement for Xenix
Organization:  SOFTWARE / DYNAMIX
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 92 10:40:07 EDT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA25195; Sat, 12 Sep 92 10:37:52 -0700
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA00340; Sat, 12 Sep 92 10:37:50 -0700
X-Received: from dynamix.UUCP by uu3.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet)id AA27970; Sat, 12 Sep 92 13:33:41 -0400
X-Received: by dynamix.com (smail2.5c)id AA25972; 12 Sep 92 10:40:07 EDT (Sat)
X-To: comp.unix.xenix.sco.usenet (comp.unix.xenix.sco)
X-In-Reply-To: <11745@ember.UUCP>; from "Paul Colley" at Sep 10, 92 9:30 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]

> What I'd like is something small that speaks UUCP, understands
> domain addresses and pathalias.  Smail 2.5 did the job reasonably
> well in a previous life, is it still the appropriate choice?

Guess that depends on who you ask!  I'd say, yes, certainly 2.5 is
appropriate, if you're doing mail via uucp.  We use it here an have no
complaints whatsoever.  

> For the record, I did once install Smail 2.5, but the experience
> was appropriately described by Paul Telles---"an unbelievable amount
> of trouble to rip out the Xenix e-mail system and replace it with
> your own."  While not hugely competent, I have installed enough
> things to know when something is a pain in the neck.  And it wasn't
> Smail 2.5 that was the pain in the neck.

First, Paul didn't give that statement about how troublesome replacing 
Xenix email is, Marc Unangst did ... Second, it's absolutely a crock of
sh*t!  What were you "ripping" out of your Xenix system???  I don't
remember removing a single thing, nor did I have any trouble installing
smail 2.5.  The only thing I goofed on the first time was the
configuration, and that was due to my lack of expertise with *nix mailers.
The installation is handled by the Makefile, under install: ... there is
ample description found about how it should be installed over the top of
the Xenix mailer ...
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 ... 
no insult intended, I had some minor pains due to my lack of experience 
as well, but only during the configuration ... the compilation and
installation went all too smoothly ...

> Can somebody send me enough details (not "add a simple line and
> install Smail 3.1") to convince me that it's worth trying to replace
> the Xenix mailer a second time?

What details are you looking for?     

> Just to clarify, I'm asking two separate questions...
> 
> 	- What mailer is appropriate (Smail 2.5, Smail 3.1, something else?)

Well, when I was looking for our replacement mailer, I was told by various
folks on the net that smail 2.5 was great for uucp (w/ domain names) using
a smart host to route your mail ... whereas smail 3.1 was more appropriate
for tcp/ip and (which would explain it's larger size and complexity) ...
This has always been my assumption, but I may be mistaken ... in any case,
2.5 has always worked great here ...

> 	- How do you make Xenix understand and use the new mailer.

Well, if I remember the installation portion of the Makefile, it replaced
various sco programs with smail via a simple cp command, and I think even a
ln or two ... nothing fancy, and *very* simple to understand if you read
thru the Makefile ... nothing got "ripped" out and I don't remember even
touching the standard sco mailer programs ... a simple make install did all
the work ... all this leads me to ask: did you get the Xenix patches
for Smail 2.5 before trying this???  if not, they're easily had in many
places on the net ... or I can send them if you want ... (and remember, if
you have problems with it, send out a post, there are a large number of
sites using smail 2.5 I suspect)                



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