Roger Fajman <[log in to unmask]> writes:
> It's just that I think that DSNs are the best long-term strategy for
> doing that.  If you run qmail on a machine with real user mailboxes
> (not just a dedicated LISTSERV machine), you would be doing a
> disservice to other LISTSERV sites, as you would not be generating
> DSNs for bounced mail.

Right, I agree.  Qmail is a very nice package in many ways, mostly
because its author is fanatical about the issues he cares about.
However, he also takes about 0 of the suggestions/requests that people
make.  MANY people have asked for DSN format bounces.  He feels that DSN
is too complex, that his format is better.  Maybe it is, but for the
compatibility reasons you mention, I think the qmail bounce format
sucks.  I actually patched qmail 0.95 to make DSN format bounces but
never did it to 1.0 -- I just use Paul's conversion script (because we
have very few real mailboxes on this system -- the vast majority of its
error messages go right into LISTSERV)

It is really tradeoff after tradeoff after tradeoff ...
--
  Norm

I am becoming an EXPERT: I learn more and more, about less and less.
Eventually I will know everything, about nothing.