Boris Pavlov wrote:
/var/qmail is not the very-right place for binaries. the prohibition of
the binary form effectively left qmail out of many distributions. the
distributions will change these paths, so, why do not put them
configurable at ./configure?
There is hope. The netqmail team has
/var/qmail is not the very-right place for binaries. the prohibition of
the binary form effectively left qmail out of many distributions. the
distributions will change these paths, so, why do not put them
configurable at ./configure?
Rick Widmer wrote:
Lampa wrote:
Of course but it can be
Maybe i didn't expressed myself clearly enough :)
A patch is a patch not a binary distributed package on which you do not
have any control, and if you need to change something you need go back to
compiling from sources which we already do anyway.
A toaster will continue to exist beyond the binary
Daniel, you are really messed all the things up:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see much difference between then and now, it's the same thing.
Giving Qmail to the public domain, in my opinion, is a bad move. Now x, y
and z versions of Qmail will start to pop-up each and everyone of them
with t
I would like (at least!) things like qmail/netqmail and vpopmail in one
box.. and bundled (at least!) in some of distros!
edi.
PS mr.Bill, care to make a move? :)
Edvin Seferovic wrote:
I don't also see a very big deal out of this because noone stoped you
before to make yourself binary packages
>I don't also see a very big deal out of this because noone stoped you
>before to make yourself binary packages with your qmail if you needed a
>rapid deployment solution. As long as you did not redistributed those
>binary packages.
>I would rather see a new version of qmail with some feature upda
I don't see much difference between then and now, it's the same thing.
Giving Qmail to the public domain, in my opinion, is a bad move. Now x, y
and z versions of Qmail will start to pop-up each and everyone of them
with their installation methods and alterations to the original code.
I don't also
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Dec 3, 2007, at 8:13 AM, Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bill Shupp wrote:
It's official:
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html
And according to this article, all his software is in public domain:
ht
Bill can now pre-package qmail + netqmail_patches + his patches. That
only saves a few steps. It doesn't change vpopmail, autorespond,
qmailadmin, squirrelmail or courier-imap. They are all separate
projects with separate release dates the toaster author must integrate.
Yes, but now all of
Lampa wrote:
Of course but it can be implement in "normal" locations (not
/var/qmail), binary can becked in many distributions and not need
patches
Which will break every program that manages qmail, including vpopmail.
I believe the fact that all qmail installations are the same is one of
i
Of course but it can be implement in "normal" locations (not
/var/qmail), binary can becked in many distributions and not need
patches
but maybe will be problem with versions (shupp toaster and others),
maybe will be netqmail continue (everything will be on author of
toaster what will he put in ba
Sasa Ebach wrote:
That is really awesome.
I am wondering if this will make a lot of toaster scripts obsolete. We
can now precompile qmail and distribute it in binary form. May we not?
Looking at this toaster, I don't see it making that much difference.
Bill can now pre-package qmail + netq
That is really awesome.
I am wondering if this will make a lot of toaster scripts obsolete. We can
now precompile qmail and distribute it in binary form. May we not?
-sasa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bill Shupp wrote:
> It's official:
>
> http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html
>
> And according to this article, all his software is in public domain:
>
> http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/11/30/0430201.shtml
>
> I haven't checked them all yet.
Awesome
14 matches
Mail list logo
