On 2024-04-16 05:01, Lexi Winter wrote:
Chris:
As I read it, and use it; mailwrapper(8) simply *assumes* that there
is *some* default (based on available options) MTA already installed,
and points to it as needed. The sendmail/dma stuff is there as a
system isn't really complete if one can't sen
Chris:
> As I read it, and use it; mailwrapper(8) simply *assumes* that there
> is *some* default (based on available options) MTA already installed,
> and points to it as needed. The sendmail/dma stuff is there as a
> system isn't really complete if one can't send mail. How had you
> intended to i
On 2024-04-15 12:32, Lexi Winter wrote:
hello,
i am working on a patch for mailwrapper, which i'd like to move from
FreeBSD-utilities to its own package. however i'm a little stymied by
usr.sbin/mailwrapper/Makefile[0], which seems to do a few fairly odd
things for the benefit of src users, suc
Don't know about other MTAs but the most common, Postfix, doesn't need
mailwrapper any more than does Sendmail.
Roger
On 2024-04-15 14:08, Roger Marquis wrote:
i am working on a patch for mailwrapper, which i'd like to move from
FreeBSD-utilities to its own package.
..
Please don't, how
On 2024-04-15 14:08, Roger Marquis wrote:
i am working on a patch for mailwrapper, which i'd like to move from
FreeBSD-utilities to its own package.
..
Please don't, however, link anything to sendmail. Even it's author says
sendmail should be deprecated. Despite the many hours some of us h
i am working on a patch for mailwrapper, which i'd like to move from
FreeBSD-utilities to its own package.
Two thumbs up for that! Might work better in base if
"OPTIONS_UNSET+=MAILWRAPPER" did what it was supposed to but it doesn't
seem like that will ever happen.
Please don't, however, link a
