On May 14, 2009, at 02:03, Victor Duchovni wrote:
Is there a real use case for binary RPMs not maintained by the
distribution release engineering teams? What's wrong with the Postfix
source, which is typically less likely to have ill-advised patches
dropped into it?
A bit off topic already b
Hi,
On May 14, 2009, at 01:07, Just E. Mail wrote:
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where
to get RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
The SRPM from Fedora should compile fine on at least EL4 and EL5. I
suggest you download it and build it yourself instead of downloa
On May 14, 2009, at 12:25, Barney Desmond wrote:
Sure; as people have already said, some vendors (cough, Redhat) don't
really keep up to date. I haven't checked all their release channels
on offer, but the core set of packages only includes Postfix 2.3.3.
*And* it doesn't come with mysql/pgsql
Hi,
On Jun 1, 2009, at 19:12, Barney Desmond wrote:
Yeah, this makes more sense if you've dealt with RPM packaging
before, there's a handful of directories in a structure that relate
to it.
Please consider compiling and building packages as a non-privileged
user rather than as root. It
