Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-13 Thread Warner Losh
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chuck Robey writes: : ALWAYS provide sensible default values, not a bunch of expert questions. If it were up to me, I'd ship with all mailers turned off by default. They are all big, bad and ugly when it comes to security. Sendmail's faults are just more widely

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-13 Thread Joe Greco
On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 05:21:24PM -0500, Joe Greco wrote: Remove Sendmail from the base system - or, at least, make it a "package" that is removable with the package management tool. Then be able to add another mailer (or an updated Sendmail) in its place. Ideally, Sendmail would be

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-13 Thread Jordan K. Hubbard
We argue about this a lot. Nobody has, as yet, ever done the work to make "bindist" a meta-package which depends (perhaps selectively) on sub-packages like groff, sendmail, gcc, et al. to achieve the required state of "bundling by default but not by requirement" in FreeBSD. This is despite the

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-13 Thread Brad Knowles
At 11:21 PM -0700 2000/4/12, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: They subsequently disappeared into the same black hole which swallows so many prospective volunteers, it seems, and all that was left to mark the event was the echos of thread in the mail archives. :-) Sorry, my fault. I

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-13 Thread Leif Neland
Well ... for that purpose I'd vote for the following: a) make more NO_ (sendmail, bind, whatever) knobs in /etc/make.conf as needed b) make the Makefiles in the install target more complete by removing (old) occurrencies of sendmail, bind, if such a NO_XXX knob has been

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-12 Thread Chuck Robey
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote: In other words, if we're going to be replacing sendmail with an alternative MTA, I'd prefer postfix over qmail, and I believe I can marshall some pretty strong arguments for that position. Perhaps it's time to revisit something I proposed

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-12 Thread Joe Greco
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote: In other words, if we're going to be replacing sendmail with an alternative MTA, I'd prefer postfix over qmail, and I believe I can marshall some pretty strong arguments for that position. Perhaps it's time to revisit something I

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-12 Thread Chuck Robey
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote: Uh, Chuck, can you tell me how many BIND and Sendmail advisories there have been in the last five years? Wouldn't it be nice if we could just tell newbies, "hey, yeah, that Sendmail has a known security issue, pkg_delete it and then add this new one

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-12 Thread Joe Greco
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote: Uh, Chuck, can you tell me how many BIND and Sendmail advisories there have been in the last five years? Wouldn't it be nice if we could just tell newbies, "hey, yeah, that Sendmail has a known security issue, pkg_delete it and then add this new

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-12 Thread Forrest Aldrich
How will this affect this /etc/mail/mailer.conf "thing" (and I wonder why that was put there to begin with). If we're going to use a mailer.conf, then it should be able to work with other MTAs; which it probably won't because they perform their respective tasks differently. _F To

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-12 Thread Chuck Robey
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote: Chuck, Please go back and read what I _wrote_. Your response assumes I made I've got your message, I quoted it fully in my first response. You asked to "Remove Sendmail from the base system", and that's a direct quote, Joe. statements that I

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-12 Thread Joe Greco
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Joe Greco wrote: Chuck, Please go back and read what I _wrote_. Your response assumes I made I've got your message, I quoted it fully in my first response. You asked to "Remove Sendmail from the base system", and that's a direct quote, Joe. Yes. That doesn't

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-12 Thread Andreas Klemm
On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 05:21:24PM -0500, Joe Greco wrote: Remove Sendmail from the base system - or, at least, make it a "package" that is removable with the package management tool. Then be able to add another mailer (or an updated Sendmail) in its place. Ideally, Sendmail would be

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-11 Thread Joe Greco
At 2:44 PM -0400 2000/4/9, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote: The advantage would be that we can have a fairly decent qmail configuration using the standard make world feature. Is there any interest in that kind of work ? Considering the number of qmail-specific pieces that need

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-11 Thread Joe Greco
On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 05:21:24PM -0500, Joe Greco wrote: While it is fantastic that FreeBSD comes out of the box so fully functional, it does make it a bit of a pain for those of us who intend to build servers - we have to disable the original before installing a new package. :-/

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-10 Thread Brad Knowles
At 2:44 PM -0400 2000/4/9, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote: The advantage would be that we can have a fairly decent qmail configuration using the standard make world feature. Is there any interest in that kind of work ? Considering the number of qmail-specific pieces that need to be

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-10 Thread Brad Knowles
At 5:40 PM -0400 2000/4/9, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote: Then people that are running a mail server could install either the Sendmail, Postfix, Qmail, Zmail, etc... MTA ports. Sounds like a great idea. The reason why I am doing this is because I DONT want sendmail. The solution that is

Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-09 Thread Patrick Bihan-Faou
Hi, I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part of the "world". I think that it would be nice to have an alternative for the mailer package to be built as part of a make world. What I would like to do is upgrate the "NO_SENDMAIL" variable to a "MAILER_SYSTEM" variable,

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-09 Thread Jon Parise
On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:44:25PM -0400, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote: I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part of the "world". I think that it would be nice to have an alternative for the mailer package to be built as part of a make world. I don't recall the

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-09 Thread Patrick Bihan-Faou
From: "Jon Parise" [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:44:25PM -0400, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote: I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part of the "world". I think that it would be nice to have an alternative for the mailer package to be built as part of a

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-09 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Patrick Bihan-Faou [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000409 14:25] wrote: From: "Jon Parise" [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:44:25PM -0400, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote: I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part of the "world". I think that it would be nice to have

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-09 Thread David O'Brien
On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:44:25PM -0400, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote: I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part of the "world". I think that it would be nice to have an alternative for the mailer package to be built as part of a make world. ... Is there any interest in

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-09 Thread Patrick Bihan-Faou
- Original Message - From: "David O'Brien" [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, Apr 09, 2000 at 02:44:25PM -0400, Patrick Bihan-Faou wrote: I have integrated the source of qmail so it can be built as part of the "world". I think that it would be nice to have an alternative for the mailer

Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world

2000-04-09 Thread Hasan Diwan
qmail is distributed as "freeware" according to freshmeat.net. They do not define the term, but by my definition, freeware would be freer than the BSD license. * Jon Parise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [000409 15:04]: I don't recall the particulars (it's been a while since I've managed a qmail