On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:17:46 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote: > I don't know, but it would be a very useful addition - and IMO, > they could dump that useless feature, that portage can do SMTP > by itself. That's so un-Unix, so Windows-like :(
Portage doesn't do SMTP by itself, it uses the Python smtplib module. Re-using existing software is very unix like > Yes, it would, but I'd actually not suggest to do so. Installing > postfix (or any SMTP server, for that matter) just for Portage > isn't the right way to go. It's too much code, opening too many > potential problems, which can be sidestepped by making > portage use /usr/sbin/sendmail instead. Why not let portage work with the same SMTP server you use for all other mail? If your mail client can send mail, why not tell portage to use the same route. There's absolutely no need to use a local MTA if you don't already have one. -- Neil Bothwick User-friendly: (adj.) trivialized, slow, incapable, and boring.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
