Why is sendmail bad?

[Kenneth Porter]

--On Thursday, February 24, 2005 4:35 PM -0500 "Chuck R. Anderson" 
<cra at WPI.EDU> wrote:

> In my environment, on 99% of all systems, I've never needed anything
> but a simple queue-to-smarthost mail sending daemon, with no receive
> functionality at all.  Therefore, I don't care which mail daemon is
> included, as long as it can do that and supports some type of
> /etc/aliases file.  I'd actually prefer to see a simple ssmtp-like
> program, but ssmtp doesn't meet those needs (it doesn't queue, doesn't
> expand local aliases).

I can understand queuing, in case the real server is down. That can be the 
simple-minded queuing implemented by most MUA's. But why aliases? Shouldn't 
those also be handled by the real server?

I'd guess that we could take the SMTP back end off an MUA and call it 
"sendmail" for application compatibility and ship that.