From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 29 12:08:38 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E49A616A47C for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 12:08:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com) Received: from turtle-out.mxes.net (turtle-out.mxes.net [216.86.168.191]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA04913C47E for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2006 12:08:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com) Received: from mxout-03.mxes.net (mxout-03.mxes.net [216.86.168.178]) by turtle-in.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35FD210563 for ; Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:45:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (unknown [87.81.140.128]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A19F51947 for ; Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:44:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 03:44:25 +0000 From: RW To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20061229034425.2f0e9262@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <45941901.7050503@mac.com> References: <4593AB3D.5090107@is-root.com> <20061228122828.GA8473@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> <20061228123616.GA8652@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> <20061228145728.4f13fa4a@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <4594049E.2040404@mac.com> <20061228203313.0752d58e@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <45941901.7050503@mac.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.10.6; i386-portbld-freebsd6.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: How to construct this port? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 12:08:39 -0000 On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 14:20:33 -0500 Chuck Swiger wrote: > Ion-Mihai IOnut Tetcu wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 12:53:34 -0500 > > Chuck Swiger wrote: > >> However, sometimes mail systems go down or block traffic for > >> whatever reason: postmaster's job is a thankless task, and this > >> was true even before spam and viral email appeared. Nowadays, > >> it's harder to get things mostly right (nevermind "perfect"), so > >> postmasters make imperfect decisions because they are faced with > >> undesirable tradeoffs. > > > > Indeed :-( > > > > However banning a hole country isn't a tradeoff in my book, it's > > just plain [inset_the_word_here]. And sin[c]e it's giving a 5XX > > code there's really no way to reach the person in question. > > I agree that blocking a whole country is a mistake. Short of posting > to the mailing list, there's no way to reach whoever it is. Having your country blocked needn't be more than a minor inconvenience. It's only the last hop IP address that counts, and there are numerous free mail services around the world, including many that give smtp access as well as webmail.