Re: Frivolous forking

[Russ Allbery]

Scott Ballantyne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Let's see. this endless argument seems to be hammering home that Redhat
> feels that Sendmail + RPM is more secure than qmail without RPM.

No.  Red Hat feels that sendmail plays better with the other children than
qmail does.  This isn't important to people who put together systems by
individual component; this *is* very important to a company that's trying
to release a coherent operating system.

If you want to wrap a coherent scheme around every package on your system
so that they can all be managed the same way, things that refuse to fit
into that packaging scheme aren't going to get included.  You don't see
Sun shipping things with Solaris that can't be put into SysV packages, do
you?

-- 
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED])         <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>