On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 12:09:34 +1200 Jim Cheetham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 09:57, Nick Rout wrote: > > also djb (author of qmail) is unpopular > > and reputedly difficult and inflexible (more flamebait). > > I'd go further - seeing as djb won't respond to mere mortals (it's > doubtful he even sees their emails) it's the community that makes up the > qmail mailing lists that now take up the mantle of being difficult and > inflexible. Knowledgable, yes, but inflexible. If you didn't compile > qmail from source and install it in exactly the directories they specify > (regardless of your systems current standards), and didn't type in > exactly the commands they say (provided with no explanation or > indication of side-effects), and haven't already read the whole archive > of the mailing list for similar questions, and haven't read every single > man page ever produced for qmail and associated programs (even the ones > that don't have man pages), if you're not using DJB's dns server, > process controller, logger and arse-licker, then you will not get > support from the most knowledgable people on the list. You'll get > flames. > > Oh, and don't (top-post your questions,thread-hijack,or use HTML) more > than once, or you'll get ignored (Actually, I might agree with that > bit). > > -jim, wishing that the presence of qmail on systems he has to look after > were optional. yes well i was aware of most of that stuff, but trying (for once) to be non judgmental :-) I was once threatened with being sued by that twit who started smoothwall, for months afterwards I got people from all corners of the globe asking me for legal advice on what to do about similar threats from the same guy. (I try and keep my lawyer .sig off the mailing lists now) -- Nick Rout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
