Where : Free sendmail portage for Win32 ?

Hi. I'm looking for a free portage of sendmail. Then, I've downloaded
the one at Windows/Ports/Sendmail/> and extracted file from zip archive. From this
point, I'm wondering how to do it works ?

Do I have to rebuild it from what in /src subdirectory. If yes, how
(don't see any guide) ?

Do I'm supposed to use the already built sendmail.exe which exists in
the src subdir too ? I've tried in a console-box and got an error ?

Does someone did use this port ? Do you know another free ?

Hoping in your lighted replies ;)

Re: Where : Free sendmail portage for Win32 ?

helgo wrote:
[deleted]
> Do you know another free ?

Have a look at the Exim Cygwin package [1]. AFAIK, Exim is essentially
a sendmail lookalike. Since Cygwin packages are already ported (and
built (compiled/linked/make-d)), there is no need to do that work
yourself.

[1]
and .
for other packages, see .

Re: Where : Free sendmail portage for Win32 ?

In article <43f88b9d$0$35882$dbd41001@news.wanadoo.nl>,
this@ddress.is.invalid says...
> helgo wrote:
> [deleted]
> > Do you know another free ?
>
> Have a look at the Exim Cygwin package [1]. AFAIK, Exim is essentially
> a sendmail lookalike. Since Cygwin packages are already ported (and
> built (compiled/linked/make-d)), there is no need to do that work
> yourself.
>
> [1]
> and .
> for other packages, see .
>

Yes, but it's quite a bit large (to install cygwin) just to get
sendmail.

Re: Where : Free sendmail portage for Win32 ?

helgo wrote:
> In article <43f88b9d$0$35882$dbd41001@news.wanadoo.nl>,
> this@ddress.is.invalid says...
> > helgo wrote:
> > [deleted]
> > > Do you know another free ?
> >
> > Have a look at the Exim Cygwin package [1]. AFAIK, Exim is essentially
> > a sendmail lookalike. Since Cygwin packages are already ported (and
> > built (compiled/linked/make-d)), there is no need to do that work
> > yourself.
> >
> > [1]
> > and .
> > for other packages, see .
> >
>
> Yes, but it's quite a bit large (to install cygwin) just to get
> sendmail.

Well, if you want sendmail, i.e. UNIX stuff, then it's handy to some
other UNIX stuff as well.

In any case, you can just get Cygwin itself (i.e. the cygwin1.dll DLL)
and then only install the needed dependencies. I.e. "Cygwin" is not one
'big' package anymore, but highly modular.

Also you can pick and choose only the needed components and then
remove the other stuff afterwards. For example I 'packaged' tin, a
newsreader, with only the needed Cygwin components. The resulting .ZIP
file is only 2MB. Hardly "quite a bit large".

Bottom line: If you have UNIX experience and want UNIX software on
Win32, then Cygwin(-based) is the way to go.

Re: Where : Free sendmail portage for Win32 ?

In article <43f8a652$0$75349$dbd4f001@news.wanadoo.nl>,
this@ddress.is.invalid says...
> Bottom line: If you have UNIX experience and want UNIX software on
> Win32, then Cygwin(-based) is the way to go.
>

Well, I've not a big practice of UNIX : far from Win[16-32] one.
However, since I've not any solution at this time, why not. But an
important question : does Exim Cygwin package accept to be called in the
same way as sendmail. It's for use (of course) from perl cgi(s).

Re: Where : Free sendmail portage for Win32 ?

helgo wrote:
> In article <43f8a652$0$75349$dbd4f001@news.wanadoo.nl>,
> this@ddress.is.invalid says...
> > Bottom line: If you have UNIX experience and want UNIX software on
> > Win32, then Cygwin(-based) is the way to go.
>
> Well, I've not a big practice of UNIX : far from Win[16-32] one.
> However, since I've not any solution at this time, why not.

If you do not have much UNIX experience and your platform is not UNIX
(but Win32), then why are you looking for a solution which is of UNIX
origin?

You say:

> But an important question : does Exim Cygwin package accept to be
> called in the same way as sendmail. It's for use (of course) from perl
> cgi(s).

But there's nothing "of course" about that. So why don't you say
*what* you want to do, instead of asking for an illogical solution
(sendmail on Win32)?

Anyway, AFAIK, Exim is mostly sendmail compatible, but I'll let the
specifics to others.

However your question let's me think that you are really looking only
for something to *send* mail with, i.e. a MSA (Mail/Message Submission
Agent), not a mail *server*, i.e. not a MTA (Mail/Message Transfer
Agent), i.e. not sendmail-functionality, but a very small *subset* of
sendmail's functionality. If so, then please say so, so others can give
a native Win32 solution. In any case, have a look at the ssmtp Cygwin
package. ssmtp is a send-only sendmail clone. I use it (sstmp with
Cygwin) in combination with my newsreader, tin, to send mail.

Re: Where : Free sendmail portage for Win32 ?

In article <43f8d401$0$95669$dbd41001@news.wanadoo.nl>,
this@ddress.is.invalid says...
> If you do not have much UNIX experience and your platform is not UNIX
> (but Win32), then why are you looking for a solution which is of UNIX
> origin?
>

Why ? Very simple : I'm developping Perl scripts being in a Win32
environment prior to upload them toward a FreeBSD one.

Thus, effectively, my only use of sendmail will be to be able to send
email without delay when script requires-it.

So, does ssmtp (or any other you have in mind) able to accept the "-t"
option, parsing the fields from what will be "printed" to the "sendmail-
like" program handle ? My concern is just to keep the same call, without
any change in scripts, except the sendmail.exe path itself.

Re: Where : Free sendmail portage for Win32 ?

helgo wrote:
> In article <43f8d401$0$95669$dbd41001@news.wanadoo.nl>,
> this@ddress.is.invalid says...
> > If you do not have much UNIX experience and your platform is not UNIX
> > (but Win32), then why are you looking for a solution which is of UNIX
> > origin?
>
> Why ? Very simple : I'm developping Perl scripts being in a Win32
> environment prior to upload them toward a FreeBSD one.
>
> Thus, effectively, my only use of sendmail will be to be able to send
> email without delay when script requires-it.

OK. Now things are clear. It would have been nice if you had given
this essential background information from the very start, so we would
not have to waste six responses to get it.

> So, does ssmtp (or any other you have in mind) able to accept the "-t"
> option, parsing the fields from what will be "printed" to the "sendmail-
> like" program handle ? My concern is just to keep the same call, without
> any change in scripts, except the sendmail.exe path itself.

Yes, ssmtp has the "-t" option and that is what I'm using to send mail
from my newsreader. Of course you can rename the ssmtp executable or
write a shell wrapper for it, so you can still invoke it with the name
"sendmail".

AFAIK, Exim also has the "-t" option, but it's an overkill if you only
have to send mail, i.e. you have another mail server which does the
actual sending to the recipient(s).

So my advice is to get and install ssmtp.

Re: Where : Free sendmail portage for Win32 ?

In article , no@no.com
says...
> Hi. I'm looking for a free portage of sendmail.

I've finally adopted this program : Fake Sendmail by Byron JONES at
.

It simply accpt the -t option, but perfectly on my Win32 plateform.
Also, he doesn't provide any -attach option like IndigoMail does, but
which is not in the original Unix sendmail. Better, I'll go to the
compatible way : build the right multipart MIME body and encoding
attachment in Base64.

Just to close the thread !

Re: Where : Free sendmail portage for Win32 ?

helgo wrote:
> In article , no@no.com
> says...
> > Hi. I'm looking for a free portage of sendmail.
>
> I've finally adopted this program : Fake Sendmail by Byron JONES at
> .
>
> It simply accpt the -t option, but perfectly on my Win32 plateform.
> Also, he doesn't provide any -attach option like IndigoMail does, but
> which is not in the original Unix sendmail. Better, I'll go to the
> compatible way : build the right multipart MIME body and encoding
> attachment in Base64.
>
> Just to close the thread !

Thanks for the feedback! Always nice to know that there is another
solution.

BTW, are you sure you got the URL right? It gave a page not found.
However it also does that for (while the domain
seems to exist and a ping works) and , so
perhaps the (web-)server is just down at the moment.