Matthew Sayler wrote: > On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 11:35:23PM +0200, Paul J Stevens wrote: > >>Getting/building a backport of gmime without the mono dependency is >>probably the least painfull. > > > Yep. > > http://www.backports.org/contribute.html > > Do you know anyone in the Debian keyring? It should be pretty easy to > drop the 2.1.19 tarball in the existing 2.1.14 woody package.
I know a couple. > > >>>>To be quite honest though, my initial reaction tends to be: sod sarge! >>>>Hail etch! Not the best sales pitch, I guess :-) >>> >>> >>>I'm actually not sure what I'm going to do long term. I'm not really >>>ready to move my mail server to etch. I may just install the package >>>from source (gasp!) and not use the Debian packaging. >> >>And that will solve this how?? > > > By build from source, I mean by hand, not via Debian. GMIME is happy to > compile without the C# bindings if you let it. Ah. You were talking about gmime, not dbmail. > I had bad luck w/ Sarge/testing. Maybe it's better now, I dunno. I run mixed sarge/etch setups all over the place. All of them critical machines. As long as I avoid hairy stuff like php4 -> php5 or zope2.7 -> zope2.8, all is dandy. -- ________________________________________________________________ Paul Stevens paul at nfg.nl NET FACILITIES GROUP GPG/PGP: 1024D/11F8CD31 The Netherlands________________________________http://www.nfg.nl
