From owner-freebsd-ports Sat Oct 28 6:10: 5 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2EA437B4C5 for ; Sat, 28 Oct 2000 06:10:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) id GAA18263; Sat, 28 Oct 2000 06:10:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 06:10:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200010281310.GAA18263@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Neil Blakey-Milner Subject: Re: ports/22269: qmail installation should also modify /etc/make.conf Reply-To: Neil Blakey-Milner Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR ports/22269; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Neil Blakey-Milner To: Gavin Cameron Cc: Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira , freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/22269: qmail installation should also modify /etc/make.conf Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 15:05:09 +0200 On Wed 2000-10-25 (10:07), Gavin Cameron wrote: > For those that never do a build world the parameter will never come into > play. For those that do a build world I'm sure that they don't want their > qmail installation corrupted or overwritten. > > Both of those points seem to say that putting the entry into > /etc/make.conf is a good thing. No. If you use mailwrapper, like you're supposed to, then it won't corrupt anything. If you want to bypass mailwrapper, then that's your choice, and then _you_ can put "NO_MAILWRAPPER" in /etc/make.conf. Neil -- Neil Blakey-Milner nbm@mithrandr.moria.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message