Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!batcomputer!itsgw!steinmetz!uunet!ateng!chip
From: chip@ateng.ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: Xenix mail system
Message-ID: <1989Feb11.165307.11338@ateng.ateng.com>
Date: 11 Feb 89 21:53:06 GMT
References: <417@ispi.UUCP> <132500003@cpe> <2842@ddsw1.MCS.COM>
Organization: A T Engineering, Tampa, FL
Lines: 16

According to karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger):
>Well, having smail3 here, and LOVING it, I can say this:
>We modified it to handle a completely different transport mechanism AND
>routing requirements in about two hours.  It drops right in place of
>"execmail" (I linked it to /bin/rmail & /bin/smail too for good measure).

Although the options accepted by execmail and Smail3 are *very* similar --
they both seem to imitate Sendmail -- they are not identical.  A version
of my execm program comes with Smail3; it should be used in place of execmail
when you install Smail3.

BTW, a version of execm for Smail2 is included in my Smail2 Xenix patches.
-- 
Chip Salzenberg             <chip@ateng.com> or <uunet!ateng!chip>
A T Engineering             Me?  Speak for my company?  Surely you jest!
	  "It's no good.  They're tapping the lines."