From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Apr 15 19:55:22 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA01275 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 19:55:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unique.usn.blaze.net.au (unique.usn.blaze.net.au [203.17.53.17]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA01265 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 1997 19:54:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from davidn@localhost) by unique.usn.blaze.net.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA22363; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:53:30 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <19970416125329.34879@usn.blaze.net.au> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:53:29 +1000 From: David Nugent To: Warner Losh Cc: Giles Lean , pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co, "Jordan K. Hubbard" , hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: on the subject of changes to -RELEASEs... References: <199704120213.MAA10732@topaz.nemeton.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.69e In-Reply-To: ; from Warner Losh on Sat Apr 12 13:08:52 EST 1997 Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Sat Apr 12 13:08:52 EST 1997, Warner Losh writes: > In message <199704120213.MAA10732@topaz.nemeton.com.au> Giles Lean writes: > [ use smrsh ] > : I recommend that we make this change for the 3.0 release. > > Me too. Any objection to just doing it? No, provided that the procmail port links itself to /usr/libexec/sm.bin on installation. This will cover 90% of the problem reports about it. And, yes, it definitely must be there, regardless of what was claimed earlier in this thread. Regards, David Nugent - Unique Computing Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Australia Voice +61-3-9791-9547 Data/BBS +61-3-9792-3507 3:632/348@fidonet davidn@freebsd.org davidn@blaze.net.au http://www.blaze.net.au/~davidn/