I will take the old rpms off my site as soon as I completely tested
qmail-run. (Well, I will move them to an "obsolete" directory for a while)
I understand that the situation is a bit confusing at the ftp site, but that
will disappear soon. In the meantime, I put a note in the READMEs.
A simple pointer: people who look for the "memphis" rpm, should not look into
the var-qmail dir. People who look for a binary distribution of qmail,
should look into var-qmail.
The only added bonus is that now one does not have to compile qmail.
The old rpm does not meet the criteria for binary redistribution.
As for patches: binary redistribution does not allow any patches used to
build the package.
I did not understand your comment about applying patches at srpm build time.
Perhaps you want to elaborate.
I am including (but am not applying by default) patches in the distribution
only if I had a chance to test them (use them). So far I used only the rbl
and the verh patches. Sam's patch sounds like a very useful patch, though,
but I have not had time to try them out.
Sam does have his own rpm that uses the patch. Also, Bruce Guenter
has an rpm that employs selected patches.
It is rather trivial to add patches to var-qmail-create. Those who cannot,
should not.
One problem I see with my old rpm is that a few people installed it, and then
they started reading the docs included with qmail, and thought they have to
create initscripts and such. Having two rpms I believe makes it clearer
what people will get (since apparently I cannot always count on them reading
the READMEs I put up).
Mate
