Fine by me... as long as installing thew patch does not affect current config :)
Best regards :)
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 09:24:14PM +0100, Johan Almqvist wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 08:21:28PM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote:
> > [smtproutes vs mailroutes]
> > if smtrproutes exists, they should be read and used. so far nothing changes
> > against stock qmail.
> > if mailrotes exists, the user has abviously read the INSTALL or README.
> > There's a good place to mention that mailroutes have precedence over
> > smtproutes. I personally would ignore the whole smtproutes file in this case,
> > but giving mailroutes precedence makes sense.
>
> Yes. This I like. I'll just ignore smtproutes if mailroutes exists! And
> the README (or whatever) will say "cp smtproutes mailroutes" and not "mv"
> - that guarantees that things will work as they used to if the user
> decides to go back to not using my patch.
>
> The code for reading the files will of course be the same, I'll even use
> the same filehandle, just pointing to different files depending on the
> existence of control/mailroutes. But I won't tell people you can have
> :qmtp in smtproutes as that will break things when you go back to not
> using QMTP. Oops, I told...
>
> Thanks, Henning!
>
> -Johan
> --
> Johan Almqvist
> http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/
--
Pedro Melo Cunha - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Novis - Dir. Rede - ISP - Infraes. Portal <http://www.novis.pt/>
Ed. Atrium Saldanha - Pça. Dq. Saldanha, 1 - 7º / 1050-094 Lisboa
tel: +351 21 0104340 - Fax: +351 21 0104301
