From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 30 20:03:51 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C26040E for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 20:03:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daniel@digsys.bg) Received: from smtp-sofia.digsys.bg (smtp-sofia.digsys.bg [193.68.21.123]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B46AD2851 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 20:03:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from digsys200-136.pip.digsys.bg (digsys200-136.pip.digsys.bg [193.68.136.200]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp-sofia.digsys.bg (8.14.6/8.14.6) with ESMTP id r6UK3gAM056747 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 30 Jul 2013 23:03:43 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from daniel@digsys.bg) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) Subject: Re: Bind in FreeBSD, security advisories From: Daniel Kalchev In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 23:03:42 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <2F6932C3-EF37-49FC-83EE-05512DD5A05C@digsys.bg> References: <20130730.154208.41672901.sthaug@nethelp.no> <51F7E292.90608@digsys.bg> To: Peter Maxwell X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 20:03:51 -0000 On 30.07.2013, at 19:49, Peter Maxwell wrote: > I personally prefer qmail over sendmail > but I wouldn't suggest qmail should be in base for the reason that sendmail > is the de facto standard on *nix shaped systems. > One can argue that BIND is the de facto standard on *nix shaped systems too. Daniel