Re: why is sendmail the adopted mta?

[Weaver <weaver@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Miguel Filipe wrote:

>  Hi there,
>
>  After talking about this on #dragonflybsd@ efnet, and with some
>  agreace that there are more pleasent, easy and secure mtas out there,
>  ppl suggested I talked about this in the MLs.
>
>  One thing that allways itches in my head is why almost all bsds use
>  sendmail has the default MTA.
>
>  Why do I have gripes with sendmail? 1) Its difficult to configure 2)
>  it has a lousy security track record 3) there are very good
>  (superior) alternatives
>
>  Why not use postfix has the default mta? 1) its secure 2) well
>  designed 3) very easy to configure 5) its fast 6) a modern
>  replacement for sendmail 7) widely adopted, and not controvertial..
>  (osx uses it by default, heard that netbsd has it in base too).
<snip>
I've been lurking for a while.
This I can't understand.
To go through the process of taking an OS, stripping the patches, 
rewriting what's necessary, relaying the plumbing, and then undo all of 
that with distinctly inferior apps?

Postfix was designed as a drop in replacement for Sendmail, and was so 
successful in the process of doing so, the original developer of the 
Sendmail project gave up on plans to completely rewrite Sendmail, and 
now works as a journo for Eweek.
The Debian default is now Exim4 for good reason.

If you're going to redo the foundations and basic structure of a house, 
what's the point in employing termite ridden timber?
Keep Sendmail as part of a selection, because the older ones that grew 
up with it, and are most comfortable with it, will always ask for it 
regardless.
And in the spirit of free/oss they should be able to have it (it's still 
available in Debian main as a deb), but Sendmail rates with Lookout Express.
Well, almost.
Regards,

Weaver.