Thomas Cameron via Postfix-users:
> On 1/30/25 5:06 AM, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
> > Those tools are not solutions to the problem, because they're reactive
> > tweaks to discrete instances of a broader mismatch between the policy
> > and requirements. But the source files from whic
Josh Good via Postfix-users:
> On 2025 Jan 29, 23:58, Gerald Galster via Postfix-users wrote:
> >
> > > So I am posting here, to ask whether someone has in his archives an RPM
> > > package of Postfix targeted to Red Hat 6.2 (classic edition)?
> >
> > Try to download and mount the ISO(s). Those i
On 2025 Jan 29, 23:58, Gerald Galster via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > So I am posting here, to ask whether someone has in his archives an RPM
> > package of Postfix targeted to Red Hat 6.2 (classic edition)?
>
> Try to download and mount the ISO(s). Those included RPM packages back then.
> https:/
On 1/30/25 5:06 AM, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
Those tools are not solutions to the problem, because they're reactive
tweaks to discrete instances of a broader mismatch between the policy
and requirements. But the source files from which the policy are
compiled are not typically al
Dnia 30.01.2025 o godz. 15:36:26 Peter via Postfix-users pisze:
> At any rate the current Red Hat public download server says that old
> Red Hat Linux images are at
> ftp://archive.download.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/, if you can find
> some other way to access it.
That FTP server seems to be dow
On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 08:47:47PM -0600, Thomas Cameron via Postfix-users
wrote:
> > This is no worse, imo than any other type of logs, including Postfix
> > logs which can be difficult for a newcomer to fully understand and which
> > has collate to help organise the logs to better present them.
