At 9:22 PM +0000 2000/10/8, attila! wrote:
> I look at 'snapshots' philosophically; if I willingly track
> FreeBSD-5.0-current, I am obviously accustomed to the risks
Understood. I just wanted to point out the philosophical
differences from the postfix perspective, and thought that it was
important that this be made explicit.
> 20001001 is the most current which Wietse is now running and
> stating that it is 'production quality'. Obviously, I will
> port 20001001 this afternoon!
No, 20001005 is the latest snapshot I know of, and appears to be
what Wietse is running himself:
$ telnet spike.porcupine.org. 25
Connected to spike.porcupine.org.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 spike.porcupine.org ESMTP Postfix (Snapshot-20001005)
Connection closed by foreign host.
However, I would not be too surprised if what he was running is
actually slightly later than this (i.e., another snapshot in
progress), and it just identifies itself as Snapshot-20001005.
> Why not consider the use of the mysql interface which
> provides dynamic aliasing?
The machines where I run this code don't strictly need a MySQL
interface for aliases. Although we do keep our internal aliases in a
MySQL database, I do not believe that it is in a format that would be
suitable for use with postfix, and therefore I'd have to create yet
another MySQL database that *was* in the proper format. This would
likely lead to synchronization problems, etc....
These are my opinions -- not to be taken as official Skynet policy
Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> || Belgacom Skynet SA/NV
Systems Architect, Mail/News/FTP/Proxy Admin || Rue Colonel Bourg, 124
Phone/Fax: +32-2-706.13.11/12.49 || B-1140 Brussels
http://www.skynet.be || Belgium
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message