D G Teed wrote:
> patk.1...@sent.as wrote:
> > I notice that Debian has settled on Exim as the default MTA, unlike many
> > (most?) other distros which seem to use Postfix.
>
> ...
> but Debian is all about choices, so you pick what you want.
>
> In Debian you are driving a car - you can get to ma
Hi,
Bob Proulx wrote:
Just because installing Debian's "standard"[1] system task installs
Exim doesn't mean that a lot of Debian users don't install Postfix.
http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=postfix
I'm surprised with the level of Exim4 installs, given the number of
guides on Postfi
patk.1...@sent.as wrote:
> Those needs happen to include making an informed business decision
> that takes into account others experience & opinions, the state of
> community/project, etc.
> Which is why I'm asking my question -- and looking forward to relevant
> answers.
At the risk of stating t
Depending on your needs, you might find worth knowing that, as noted in
/usr/share/doc/exim4-base/README.Debian.gz included in exim4-base
4.72-6+squeeze2:
4.5. SELinux
There is no SELinux policy for Exim4 available so far. Until this is
resolved, users should use postfix or sendmail if th
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 7:00 PM, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're evaluating our company's future server platform, and are pretty
> much decided on Debian.
At some companies, this would be regarded a miracle to achieve.
I'm glad it worked out for you.
> I notice that Debian has settled on Exim as the def
Camaleón wrote:
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 15:00:22 -0700, patk.1034 wrote:
(...)
Since 'here' is where Debian-ites 'live', I'd like to ask for
experienced opinioins. Specifically in a Debian-server world, why one
over the other?
One thing to consider is what ELSE you're going to be running on you
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 15:00:22 -0700, patk.1034 wrote:
(...)
> Since 'here' is where Debian-ites 'live', I'd like to ask for
> experienced opinioins. Specifically in a Debian-server world, why one
> over the other?
(...)
I can tell you what I use and that's Postfix.
To be sincere, I'm sticked t
> What an amazingly patronising reply from someone seeking advice!
Patronising? Hardly.
Tbh, I'd initially considered your response of a similar vein, but chose
to give you the benefit of the doubt, thank you for your opinion, and
continue the discussion.
Seems I'm making all sorts of mistakes
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 15:37:29 -0700, patk.1034 wrote:
>> What difference does it make which MTA is the distribution default?
>
> Given your response, I'd guess that it doesn't to you. Thanks for your
> opinion.
>
> It certainly made enough difference for Debian to choose -- differently
> than mo
> But on this mailing list that is simply accepted practice. :-)
Yes, which is why I'm here asking :-)
> You do realize that the discussing Exim and Postfix is like the
> classic discussions between emacs and vi? It will be difficult to
> really get objective answers. People like what they lik
> What difference does it make which MTA is the distribution default?
Given your response, I'd guess that it doesn't to you. Thanks for your
opinion.
It certainly made enough difference for Debian to choose -- differently
than most. I've found Debian's 'decisions' as a distro to be generally
o
patk.1...@sent.as wrote:
> We're evaluating our company's future server platform, and are pretty
> much decided on Debian.
An excellent choice. But on this mailing list that is simply accepted
practice. :-)
> I notice that Debian has settled on Exim as the default MTA, unlike many
> (most?) oth
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 15:00:22 -0700, patk.1034 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're evaluating our company's future server platform, and are pretty
> much decided on Debian.
>
> I notice that Debian has settled on Exim as the default MTA, unlike many
> (most?) other distros which seem to use Postfix.
>
> As w
Hi,
We're evaluating our company's future server platform, and are pretty
much decided on Debian.
I notice that Debian has settled on Exim as the default MTA, unlike many
(most?) other distros which seem to use Postfix.
As we're also evaluating our mail server tech, I'd like to understand
the wh
Thanks, Johan and Ron!
--
Dotan Cohen
http://bido.com
http://what-is-what.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/x2r880dece01004242303k2a8c78t6545f43
On 04/24/2010 01:02 PM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 24 April 2010 02:38, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 04/22/2010 03:54 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
[snip]
It looks to me that Backports is the best for an everyday
user who values stability, and prefers to use released software
version. Please let me know where I
2010-04-24 20:02, Dotan Cohen skrev:
Thanks, Ron. I don't see the contradiction: I want released software,
no betas or alphas. I am using the word "stable" as in "not crashy
(doesn't fall down)", not in the sense of "doesn't change".
I wondered if Testing or Unstable would provide that.
I use
On 24 April 2010 02:38, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 04/22/2010 03:54 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> [snip]
>>
>> It looks to me that Backports is the best for an everyday
>> user who values stability, and prefers to use released software
>> version. Please let me know where I am mistaken. Thanks.
>
> "stabl
Im still learning how to use mailing lists I read alot but I dont reply
alot.
Testing would be your best bet. If you want current you need debian
unstable.. I think you can get the binary's from the experiential repo
though
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 04/22/2010 03:
On 04/22/2010 03:54 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
[snip]
It looks to me that Backports is the best for an everyday
user who values stability, and prefers to use released software
version. Please let me know where I am mistaken. Thanks.
"stable with current releases" is a contradiction. If you want
c
On 2010-04-23, Sthu Deus wrote:
> Thank You for Your time and answer, Liam:
>
>>Or you could wait for the next stable release, or at least for the
>>freeze announcement.
>
> Will it be 4.4 version of KDE in next release? - I thought, 4.3 - that is in
> testing for now.
>
>
I don't use KDE, so I
Thank You for Your time and answer, Liam:
>Or you could wait for the next stable release, or at least for the
>freeze announcement.
Will it be 4.4 version of KDE in next release? - I thought, 4.3 - that is in
testing for now.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
w
> Fedora 12 has KDE 4.4 and it's in a pretty stable shape. Also, it's
> officially supported,
> as opposed to OpenSUSE.
>
I used Fedora from Core 3 to 6. It got very unstable at that point, FC
6, 7, and 8 were breaking critical packages almost monthly. I am
reluctant to go back.
That said, I thin
On 04/22/2010 11:54 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I am looking for KDE 4.4.2 and Open Office 3.2 packages for Lenny. I
have found qt-kde.debian, Debian Experimental, Testing, Unstable, and
Backports. It looks to me that Backports is the best for an everyday
user who values stability, and prefers to use
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 18:13:49 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>> It's hard for distributions to include the latest KDE SC available
>> *and* deliver it as "stable". Rolling distros (such Arch Linux), which
>> are always up-to-date, may fit better into this schema.
>>
>>
> That is where a third-party repo
> It's hard for distributions to include the latest KDE SC available *and*
> deliver it as "stable". Rolling distros (such Arch Linux), which are
> always up-to-date, may fit better into this schema.
>
That is where a third-party repo would come in, such as Backports.
Kubuntu, for all it's flaws,
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:26:07 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>> Unfortunately, the goals of always having the latest KDE and a stable
>> distro are not compatible.
>>
>>
> Not necessarily. KDE has a regular release schedule, with a point
> release about once a month. I would consider a distro that inclu
On 2010-04-22, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>> Have you asked other KDE contributors about their setups?
>>
>
> Yes, there is a lot of favour towards Mandriva and Suse. Kubuntu with
> Project Timelord is also being mentioned. If I jump ship from a Debian
> based distro, it will likely be to Suse.
Yes, you
> Unfortunately, the goals of always having the latest KDE and a stable distro
> are not compatible.
>
Not necessarily. KDE has a regular release schedule, with a point
release about once a month. I would consider a distro that included
the latest point releases stable in the sense of no (or few)
On 2010-04-22, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>> I don't know of any backported binaries, so you would have to compile it
>> yourself. That, however, would be a major undertaking, and presupposes
>> that the latest KDE4 even compiles against the versions of the various
>> libraries included in lenny.
>>
>
> Y
> I don't know of any backported binaries, so you would have to compile it
> yourself. That, however, would be a major undertaking, and presupposes
> that the latest KDE4 even compiles against the versions of the various
> libraries included in lenny.
>
Yes, compiling KDE is not a hassle that I wa
On 2010-04-22, Dotan Cohen wrote:
---SNIP---
>From where to acquire KDE 4.4.2 in a reasonably safe manner?
I don't know of any backported binaries, so you would have to compile it
yourself. That, however, would be a major undertaking, and presupposes
that the latest KDE4 even compiles against the
On 22 April 2010 12:25, Liam O'Toole wrote:
> On 2010-04-22, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>> I am looking for KDE 4.4.2 and Open Office 3.2 packages for Lenny. I
>> have found qt-kde.debian, Debian Experimental, Testing, Unstable, and
>> Backports. It looks to me that Backports is the best for an everyday
On 2010-04-22, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> I am looking for KDE 4.4.2 and Open Office 3.2 packages for Lenny. I
> have found qt-kde.debian, Debian Experimental, Testing, Unstable, and
> Backports. It looks to me that Backports is the best for an everyday
> user who values stability, and prefers to use re
I am looking for KDE 4.4.2 and Open Office 3.2 packages for Lenny. I
have found qt-kde.debian, Debian Experimental, Testing, Unstable, and
Backports. It looks to me that Backports is the best for an everyday
user who values stability, and prefers to use released software
version. Please let me know
on Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 01:08:37AM -0600, Matt Greer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I think I'd be fine with potato despite the old packages. It seems
> most people want woody instead. But I do have some questions on Debian
> that will hopefully help me transistion over better.
For server purposes,
on Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 11:23:33AM -0600, Matt Greer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Thursday 13 December 2001 01:25 am, Kurt Lieber wrote:
<...>
> > Honestly, I'd recommend skipping testing and going straight to
> > unstable.
>
> This is the first I've seen of this recommendation. I've scoured
* Kurt Lieber ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Dec 13. 2001 02:19]:
> Honestly, I'd recommend skipping testing and going straight to unstable.
> Despite the name, unstable is quite acceptable as a desktop machine. I
> wouldn't run it as a server, but I wouldn't run testing on a server, either.
> Testing
On Thursday 13 December 2001 01:25 am, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> >This would
> > require unstable sources in my source.list file, right?
>
> No -- you'd need testing sources in your sources.list file.
Oops, that's what I meant :)
> Honestly, I'd recommend skipping testing and going straight to unstabl
On Wednesday 12 December 2001 11:25 pm, Kurt Lieber wrote:
[snip]
> Honestly, I'd recommend skipping testing and going straight to unstable.
> Despite the name, unstable is quite acceptable as a desktop machine. I
> wouldn't run it as a server, but I wouldn't run testing on a server,
> either. Tes
On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 01:08:37AM -0600, Matt Greer wrote:
> Is there any documentation out there on installing Nvidia drivers for a pre 4
> X server and 2.2 kernel? Nvidia assumes you're running the latest releases.
The drivers are written for Linux 2.4.x and X 4.x, you are as likely to get
th
Matt Greer wrote:
>Hello,
>If I did decide on woody, how exactly would I install it? I know that
>question has been asked many times, but I'm confused about the optimal >way to
>do it. Most seem to suggest installing a very minimal potato >(although what
>"minimal" means I'm not exactly sure,
On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 01:08:37 -0600, Matt Greer wrote:
> If I did decide on woody, how exactly would I install it? I know that
> question has been asked many times, but I'm confused about the optimal way to
> do it. Most seem to suggest installing a very minimal potato
That used to be the be
On Wednesday 12 December 2001 11:08 pm, Matt Greer wrote:
> If I did decide on woody, how exactly would I install it? I know that
> question has been asked many times, but I'm confused about the optimal way
> to do it. Most seem to suggest installing a very minimal potato (although
> what "minimal
Hello,
I am currently a Mandrake user and think I'd like to switch to Debian. I've
read up a lot on Debian and like most of what I hear. I also had Debian 2.2r4
potato installed for a while but had to bail out because I couldn't get some
crucial things going correctly.
I think I'd be fine with
45 matches
Mail list logo
