On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Jeremy Kitchen wrote:
but see, it's so broken that me fixing it would break other packages that
depend on their qmail's brokenness. Therefore, I will not use gentoo's
qmail ebuilds, and I strongly advise others not to as well. by the way, I
hear that why don't you fix them crap
On Thursday 08 July 2004 07:43 am, Peter Stuge wrote:
This is one thing that makes me glad I run gentoo, since it's source
based there are more frequent updates to the package, usually adding
patches that people want. :)
ugh, but gentoo's qmail is a big pile of poo.
so many ridiculous patches
Jeremy Kitchen wrote:
On Thursday 08 July 2004 07:43 am, Peter Stuge wrote:
This is one thing that makes me glad I run gentoo, since it's source
based there are more frequent updates to the package, usually adding
patches that people want. :)
ugh, but gentoo's qmail is a big pile of poo.
so many
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 11:04:38 -0500
Jeremy Kitchen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ugh, but gentoo's qmail is a big pile of poo.
so many ridiculous patches and broken methodology that it really sickens me to
even look at the ebuild.
Go ahead, write a better one, and submit it to bugs.gentoo.org :)
On Thursday 08 July 2004 06:43 pm, Dennis Freise wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 11:04:38 -0500
Jeremy Kitchen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ugh, but gentoo's qmail is a big pile of poo.
so many ridiculous patches and broken methodology that it really sickens
me to even look at the ebuild.
Go
