Sahil Tandon wrote: > I do not believe Mark should have to jump through extra hoops, or that > you should revert the change. This is a FreeBSD port-specific problem > created by me that I will address as soon as I can.
Wietse Venema wrote: > Considering the short time left before the next stable release I > am considering the following schedule: > - Revert to Postfix 2.8 behavior, and complete the 2.9 release cycle. > - In the 2.10 development cycle, make Postfix build on hosts that > have no network interfaces. That would eliminate problems like > Mark's hosts without IPv4, FreeBSD "port" builds on hosts with > dysfunctional IPv6, and other weird environments. > - In the 2.10 development cycle, (re)start the first phase of the > IPv6-on-by-default transition, and do this early enough that there > is time to make sure that all maintainers are on board. That would be sad news, considering how long it takes for "distributions" to jump on each new major version. As long as main.cf gets adjusted if necessary during install to maintain backward compatibility, the builtin default does not matter, as long as the package can be build and installed. Mark
