On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 14:39 +0100, Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, V. T. Mueller wrote:
>
> > We usually install strictly "minimal" systems and have been happily using
> > pcretest that came alongside exim not only for the latter. Well, installing
> > it
> > separately would be no big deal, but nevertheless we would prefer having it
> > available already with exim :)
>
> Aha! That provides a counter-example to my assertion about pcretest. OK,
> if people find it useful, then it probably makes sense to leave things
> the way they are.
Providing a build mechanism to allow exim to be built against a system
PCRE would be useful - looking very quickly at my laptop I can see at
least 6 packages using PCRE, only one of which links to the system PCRE
library.
This means that if there is a security vulnerability found in PCRE I
have 6 packages to update, whereas if everything used (dynamic linking)
the system version there would be one package to update. This is
exactly the problem which caused significant pain to people a couple of
years back when we were chasing all the packages that happened to have
zlib compiled in statically.
Nigel.
--
[ Nigel Metheringham [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
[ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details
at http://www.exim.org/ ##
