On Monday, October 14, 2019 4:37:01 PM EDT Viktor Dukhovni wrote: ... > I am not a fan of starting service daemons via spawn(8). There are > better options (xinetd, systemd, just directly bind the socket, > ...). This would be something for the package maitainer to consider.
It's not really a daemon. I'd intended to make it one, thus the name, but have never gotten around to it. By the time it became clear that wasn't going to happen, the current name had already caught on and I have been reluctant to change it. It does expect to be spawned by postfix. Whatever his error is, that's not it. Sorry for the confusion. Scott K
