From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 13 13:45:01 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF93F106568B for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 13:45:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C44C8FC17 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 13:45:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost.codelab.cz [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3830519E048; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:29:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (r5bb235.net.upc.cz [86.49.61.235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BBE1119E023; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:29:40 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4B4DCAC4.70108@quip.cz> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:29:40 +0100 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100104 SeaMonkey/2.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "S.N.Grigoriev" References: <661263379937@webmail51.yandex.ru> <4B4DAF41.5090903@infracaninophile.co.uk> <10471263386697@webmail49.yandex.ru> In-Reply-To: <10471263386697@webmail49.yandex.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sendmail replacement X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 13:45:01 -0000 S.N.Grigoriev wrote: [...] > I thank you for your response. All you wrote is quite right. > But it is a general rule not to use in the system two sets > of slightly different programs with duplicating names. It is > a direct way to have problems. > > For example, all third party scripts should be revised to check > absolute pathes, program search results becomes depending > of the PATH value, and so on. > > It is relatively easy to do such revisions on a small home system. > But a production server with significant amount of third party software > will require a lot of time to do that job. > > To my mind it will be better to have an options in the port Makefile > allowing to replace the sendmail files in place. I fully understand your doubts, but if you are talking about PATH and the stuff, sendmail from PATH (/usr/sbin/sendmail) is not a real sendmail, it is symlink to wrapper using settings from /etc/mail/mailer.conf. No application can be confused. Miroslav Lachman