Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 14:29:30 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Jens Rehsack <rehsack@liwing.de> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removing Sendmail Message-ID: <XFMail.20030402142930.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <3E8B093D.4010500@liwing.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02-Apr-2003 Jens Rehsack wrote: > John Baldwin wrote: >> On 02-Apr-2003 Peter Schultz wrote: >> >>>I'm sorry for beating a dead horse. A guy and I from tcbug were just >>>trying to fix his postfix installation, he does not know what happened, >>>it just stopped working. There would not have been a problem if >>>sendmail wasn't tied into the system so closely. I'm just hoping core >>>will say, "submit a working solution and it will be done," so that >>>there's a little inspiration here. >>> >>>Pete... >> >> >> First, core@ is not the appropriate body for that type of request. >> Both current@ and arch@ are much better targets. Second, is >> NO_SENDMAIL + the postfix port inadequate? >> > > The problem I see with that is, that even a minimalistic base install > installs things like sendmail, ppp, atm-stuff, g77 and so on. Unless you are building an embedded device these are not really all that significant. If you are building an embedded device, you probably are better off building an in-house custom release. NO_SENDMAIL, etc. can aid in simplifying the build of such a release and help prevent breakage to an existing environment during world upgrades. That seems to be a fairly decent solution to me. > I really think splitting the base in some sub-parts would it make much > easier to do NO_SENDMAIL on my own. So I had to remove each not required > file separately. That's no good solution. [stepping back a bit ] I find an odd situation here whenever this topic comes up. One the one hand, people are always wanting to split the entire base system up into small packages for each little piece of the base. On the other hand, one of FreeBSD's selling points in real-world environments is that it doesn't have a bunch of little packages for the base system like Linux distros. Do people really prefer something like having rpm's for /bin/ps to having one lump base dist for all of /bin, /sbin, etc.? -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20030402142930.jhb>