Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 09:53:14 -0600 From: "Jaime Bozza" <wheelman@nuc.net> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, "Peter Wemm" <peter@netplex.com.au> Cc: "Mike Tancsa" <mike@sentex.net>, <rcramer@sytex.net>, <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Final upgrades of tools in 2.2-STABLE (Re: Sendmail 8.9.1a ) Message-ID: <000201be34d5$ad170d00$313d31cc@electron.nuc.net> In-Reply-To: <14812.915093240@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > On the other, it messes up people tracking 2.2-stable just for minor bug > > fixes and probably wouldn't appreciate arriving at work in the morning and > > discovering they've now got to reconfigure sendmail and bind and that ipfw > > now gives parameter size errors. > > For this reason, I'd prefer to avoid bind or anything else which > requires intervention. Upgrading sendmail would be fine. :) Personally, I'm not too worried about upgrading the products themselves, as we have ports for that if need be. I *WOULD* like to see a NO_SENDMAIL option for make world though. This would help for existing systems running qmail or other assorted mail hacks. (Or even if one was using the sendmail port) (NO_PERL was have. NO_SENDMAIL definitely, and perhaps NO_BIND, though our current DNS servers run fine with the bind8 port without make world messing up the setup) Jaime Bozza Nucleus Communications, Inc. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000201be34d5$ad170d00$313d31cc>