Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!uunet!bfmny0!tneff
From: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: differences between smail 2.5 and smail 3.x
Message-ID: <15636@bfmny0.BFM.COM>
Date: 5 Jul 90 20:53:28 GMT
References: <2690C7F4.A40@tct.uucp> <1990Jul4.221134.15621@tolerant.com> <:MG4LEG@xds13.ferranti.com>
Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff)
Lines: 16

"Smail 3" is really GNU sendmail in all but name.  Its only relationship
to smail 2.5 seems to be naming coincidence and/or someone's intention
that it be a logical successor.  All the code is new, and it's huuuge.

My impression, shared with others judging from mailed comments, is that
UUCP leaf sites don't need smail 3 -- smail 2.5 plus Deliver give total
flexibility and functionality at a fraction of the code size and
complexity.  Networked sites and domain servers can probably make full
use of Smail 3's features.

The latest smail 3.1 was announced a while ago for FTP, I forget where;
but UUNET's archives will probably get it shortly -- look at
pub/smail3.tar.Z in the ls-lR and see if it's the July release.
-- 
"DO NOT, repeat, DO NOT blow the hatch!"  /)\   Tom Neff
"Roger....hatch blown!"                   \(/   tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM