Xref: utzoo comp.mail.misc:5286 comp.protocols.nfs:2202
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!lethe!tvcent!comspec!censor!isgtec!bmw
From: bmw@isgtec.uucp (Bruce M. Walker)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.protocols.nfs
Subject: Re: Symlink locking considered useless over NFS
Message-ID: <999@isgtec.UUCP>
Date: 23 Apr 91 18:59:45 GMT
References: <3064@cirrusl.UUCP> <280EE8A1.30D@tct.com> <3074@cirrusl.UUCP> <28123DD5.1716@tct.com>
Sender: news@isgtec.UUCP
Reply-To: bmw@isgtec.UUCP (Bruce M. Walker)
Organization: ISG Technologies Inc. Mississauga Ont. Canada
Lines: 16

In article <28123DD5.1716@tct.com> chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
> If I had a Sun machine, I'd avoid NFS-mounted mailboxes like the
> plague.

Well, my site demands centralized mailboxes.  How would you suggest
I do this without NFS?

- I am aware of POP[23]/PCMAIL/IMAP: we use elm, ucbMail and mh.  Only
  mh supports one of these (POP2).

- We have Sun4's, SGI's, DECstations, an IBM RS6000 and Convergent Tech's.
  Can one of these do a better job of being a mail-host?

--
         "Remember, only *you* can prevent emacs!"
bmw@isgtec.uucp  [ ..uunet!utai!lsuc!isgtec!bmw ]  Bruce Walker