Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!convex!datri From: datri@convex.com (Anthony A. Datri) Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.andrew Subject: Re: Why isn't ATK more widely used? Message-ID: <104457@convex.convex.com> Date: 30 Jul 90 19:15:31 GMT References: <104405@convex.convex.com> Sender: news@convex.com Organization: Convex Computer Corporation; Richardson, TX Lines: 29 >NFS. That's all there is to it. AMS is no worse than any other mail >reader in this situation. I know, I know. I didn't mean to imply that AMS was any different. >You're right to be concerned about locking on /usr/spool/mail files, but >you're wrong to think that AMS makes the situation any worse. I don't -- I want to understand the issues for *any* mailer. >A. Not have your spool files on NFS (that's what we do at Bellcore), or I have little choice -- my workstation is diskless, and the machines that have spool/mail and to which aliases are directed are platforms on which ATK doesn't really run. Hence, to use Messages, it's got to be on my workstation, over NFS. >C. Give up on reliability. Granted, I haven't noticed a problem in many months of usage, but I wouldn't feel good about turning it loose for my users without full comprehension. >At CMU, we build a whole new delivery system because of problems like >this. Relies on AFS, though, doesn't it? --