From owner-freebsd-security Wed Dec 4 15:53:12 1996 Return-Path: owner-security Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.3/8.7.3) id PAA22980 for security-outgoing; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 15:53:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from rocky.mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA22975 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 15:53:07 -0800 (PST) Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.mt.sri.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA12451; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 16:53:01 -0700 (MST) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 16:53:01 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <199612042353.QAA12451@rocky.mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams To: Richard Wackerbarth Cc: Nate Williams , freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sendmail 8.8.4 questions... In-Reply-To: References: <199612041958.NAA21344@alecto.physics.uiuc.edu> <199612041951.MAA11333@rocky.mt.sri.com> <199612042058.NAA11575@rocky.mt.sri.com> <199612042334.QAA12288@rocky.mt.sri.com> Sender: owner-security@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > >> >That would be 2.1.6.1. And, it's a good release except for bugs that > >> >weren't known about until *after* it was set in stone such as the > >> >sendmail bug. > >> > >> And a very few changes have been committed since then. > > > >I don't think so. Changes have been committed since 2.1.6, but not > >since it was frozen. > > WRONG! Look at the ctm updates in the archive. They are triggered by SOME > change in the CVS tree for the 2_1_0 tag. I didnt' see any that came after. I think you're confused. > >2.1.* is dead in my mind, and I suspect many others. It lived long past > >it's usefulness in the developers mind. > > That is a "developer's" attitude. If we wish to really have FreeBSD used in > commercial environments, we need to adopt more of a "user's" attitude. I did. I offered to integrate the "users's" patches, and none were submitted. The users have yet to show they care. Nate