>
> Well ... for that purpose I'd vote for the following:
>
> a) make more
> NO_ (sendmail, bind, whatever)
>knobs in /etc/make.conf as needed
> b) make the Makefiles in the install target more complete by
>removing (old) occurrencies of sendmail, bind, if such a
>NO_XXX knob has
At 11:21 PM -0700 2000/4/12, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> They subsequently disappeared into the same black hole which swallows
> so many prospective volunteers, it seems, and all that was left to
> mark the event was the echos of thread in the mail archives. :-)
Sorry, my fault. I sho
We argue about this a lot. Nobody has, as yet, ever done the work to
make "bindist" a meta-package which depends (perhaps selectively) on
sub-packages like groff, sendmail, gcc, et al. to achieve the required
state of "bundling by default but not by requirement" in FreeBSD.
This is despite the f
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 05:21:24PM -0500, Joe Greco wrote:
> > Remove Sendmail from the base system - or, at least, make it a "package"
> > that is removable with the package management tool. Then be able to add
> > another mailer (or an updated Sendmail) in its place. Ideally, Sendmail
> > wo
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Chuck Robey
writes:
: ALWAYS provide sensible default values, not a bunch of expert questions.
If it were up to me, I'd ship with all mailers turned off by
default. They are all big, bad and ugly when it comes to security.
Sendmail's faults are just more widely pu
On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 05:21:24PM -0500, Joe Greco wrote:
> Remove Sendmail from the base system - or, at least, make it a "package"
> that is removable with the package management tool. Then be able to add
> another mailer (or an updated Sendmail) in its place. Ideally, Sendmail
> would be ava
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote:
>
> > Chuck,
> >
> > Please go back and read what I _wrote_. Your response assumes I made
>
> I've got your message, I quoted it fully in my first response. You asked
> to "Remove Sendmail from the base system", and that's a direct quote, Joe.
Yes. Th
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote:
> Chuck,
>
> Please go back and read what I _wrote_. Your response assumes I made
I've got your message, I quoted it fully in my first response. You asked
to "Remove Sendmail from the base system", and that's a direct quote, Joe.
> statements that I cert
How will this affect this /etc/mail/mailer.conf "thing" (and I wonder
why that was put there to begin with).
If we're going to use a mailer.conf, then it should be able to
work with other MTAs; which it probably won't because they perform
their respective tasks differently.
_F
To Unsubscribe
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote:
>
> > Uh, Chuck, can you tell me how many BIND and Sendmail advisories there have
> > been in the last five years?
> >
> > Wouldn't it be nice if we could just tell newbies, "hey, yeah, that Sendmail
> > has a known security issue, pkg_delete it and then a
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote:
> Uh, Chuck, can you tell me how many BIND and Sendmail advisories there have
> been in the last five years?
>
> Wouldn't it be nice if we could just tell newbies, "hey, yeah, that Sendmail
> has a known security issue, pkg_delete it and then add this new on
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote:
>
> > > In other words, if we're going to be replacing sendmail with an
> > > alternative MTA, I'd prefer postfix over qmail, and I believe I can
> > > marshall some pretty strong arguments for that position.
> >
> > Perhaps it's time to revisit
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote:
> > In other words, if we're going to be replacing sendmail with an
> > alternative MTA, I'd prefer postfix over qmail, and I believe I can
> > marshall some pretty strong arguments for that position.
>
> Perhaps it's time to revisit something I pr
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 05:21:24PM -0500, Joe Greco wrote:
> > While it is fantastic that FreeBSD comes out of the box so fully
> > functional, it does make it a bit of a pain for those of us who intend
> > to build servers - we have to disable the original before installing a
> > new package.
On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 05:21:24PM -0500, Joe Greco wrote:
> While it is fantastic that FreeBSD comes out of the box so fully
> functional, it does make it a bit of a pain for those of us who intend
> to build servers - we have to disable the original before installing a
> new package. :-/
man m
> At 2:44 PM -0400 2000/4/9, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote:
>
> > The advantage would be that we can have a fairly decent qmail
> configuration
> > using the standard make world feature.
> >
> > Is there any interest in that kind of work ?
>
> Considering the number of qmail-specific piece
At 5:40 PM -0400 2000/4/9, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote:
>> Then people that are running a mail server could install either the
>> Sendmail, Postfix, Qmail, Zmail, etc... MTA ports.
>
> Sounds like a great idea. The reason why I am doing this is because I DONT
> want sendmail. The solution that
At 2:44 PM -0400 2000/4/9, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote:
> The advantage would be that we can have a fairly decent qmail configuration
> using the standard make world feature.
>
> Is there any interest in that kind of work ?
Considering the number of qmail-specific pieces that need to be
qmail is distributed as "freeware" according to freshmeat.net. They do
not define the term, but by my definition, freeware would be freer
than the BSD license.
* Jon Parise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [000409 15:04]:
> I don't recall the particulars (it's been a while since I've
> managed a qmail installa
- Original Message -
From: "David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:44:25PM -0400, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote:
> > I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part of the
> > "world". I think that it would be nice to have an alternative for the
mailer
On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:44:25PM -0400, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote:
> I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part of the
> "world". I think that it would be nice to have an alternative for the mailer
> package to be built as part of a make world.
...
> Is there any interest in
* Patrick Bihan-Faou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000409 14:25] wrote:
> From: "Jon Parise" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:44:25PM -0400, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote:
> >
> > > I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part
> > > of the "world". I think that it would be
From: "Jon Parise" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:44:25PM -0400, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote:
>
> > I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part
> > of the "world". I think that it would be nice to have an
> > alternative for the mailer package to be built as par
On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:44:25PM -0400, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote:
> I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part
> of the "world". I think that it would be nice to have an
> alternative for the mailer package to be built as part of a make
> world.
I don't recall the particu
Hi,
I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part of the
"world". I think that it would be nice to have an alternative for the mailer
package to be built as part of a make world.
What I would like to do is upgrate the "NO_SENDMAIL" variable to a
"MAILER_SYSTEM" variable, which
25 matches
Mail list logo
