I fail to see the point of the question.

I've been a sysadmin, or have done sysadminny things on a wide range of (Unix) OSses: SunOS, Solaris, Linux (more distros than I care to remember), HP-UX, AIX, SGI, *BSD. I've used Perl on all of those platforms. I've worked with MTAs on all of these platforms.

I've never ever let my choice of MTA be influenced by Perl. I've never had a problem using an MTA with Perl -- any MTA which isn't tied in to the environment (such as sendmail, qmail, postfix, exim, ...) has a standard way of delivering email to it. Typically, a /usr/lib/sendmail dropin. Perl doesn't care with MTA you are using, and the MTA doesn't care mail was composed with Perl.

There are other factors that decide which MTA I use on a platform, including, but not limiting to:

• Personal preference.
• Ease of configuration.
• Tools available on the box (if there's no C compiler, and installing one takes a long time, I'm more inclined to leave the vendor supplied MTA).
• Intended use for the MTA. It makes quite a difference if the MTA is going to handle the mail of 40,000 users, or whether it's just got to mail the occasional report to an admin.
• Directly connected to the internet or not?
• The "special" email addresses: basically any address that does needs some other action than local delivery or forwarding.
• Licensing.
• Support. Not just for the MTA, but also for applications running on the box. If the box runs an important application which uses a certain MTA, and one loses support if the MTA is replaced, it's certainly a factor in deciding whether or not to replace the MTA.