On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Simon J Muddsjm...@pobox.com wrote:
sjm...@pobox.com (Simon J Mudd) writes:
For those interested I've updated the packages and you should be able
to find:
postfix-2.6.0-1.src.rpm and
postfix-2.6.0-1.rhel5.x86_64.rpm
Updated to 2.6.1 as I
For those interested I've updated the packages and you should be able
to find:
postfix-2.6.0-1.src.rpm and
postfix-2.6.0-1.rhel5.x86_64.rpm
Updated to 2.6.1 as I hadn't seen Wietse's 2.6.1 update.
Thanks a bunch, Simon.
--Brian
sjm...@pobox.com (Simon J Mudd) writes:
For those interested I've updated the packages and you should be able
to find:
postfix-2.6.0-1.src.rpm and
postfix-2.6.0-1.rhel5.x86_64.rpm
Updated to 2.6.1 as I hadn't seen Wietse's 2.6.1 update.
Simon
sjm...@pobox.com (Simon J Mudd) writes:
For those interested I've updated the packages and you should be able
to find:
postfix-2.6.0-1.src.rpm and
postfix-2.6.0-1.rhel5.x86_64.rpm
Updated to 2.6.1 as I hadn't seen Wietse's 2.6.1 update.
Simon
Thank you Simon.
Chas.
sjm...@pobox.com (Simon J Mudd) writes:
I'll see if I can make some time to build some 2.6 rpms, but am likely
to respond more if there are people who show an interest in these
rpms I build.
For those interested I've updated the packages and you should be able
to find:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 14:48:12 PM -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
I, for one, would urge the more sophisticated users, who need the
latest release, to learn how to use/build source RPMs, and build the
official Postfix release via source RPM that resembles the vendor's
support source RPM, but
On Mon, May 18, 2009 20:38:54 PM +0200, Simon J Mudd wrote:
I'll see if I can make some time to build some 2.6 rpms, but am
likely to respond more if there are people who show an interest in
these rpms I build.
+1 for me, thanks if you find the time!
Marco
--
Your own civil rights and the
On Mon, May 18, 2009 20:38:54 PM +0200, Simon J Mudd wrote:
I'll see if I can make some time to build some 2.6 rpms, but am
likely to respond more if there are people who show an interest in
these rpms I build.
+1 for me, thanks if you find the time!
2.7 snapshot rpms for CentOSv4
I'll see if I can make some time to build some 2.6 rpms, but am likely
to respond more if there are people who show an interest in these rpms
I build.
+1 for me as well, Simon. I appreciate your work and have used your RPMs
for years to keep my mail servers and filters up to date.
I'll see if I can make some time to build some 2.6 rpms, but am likely
to respond more if there are people who show an interest in these rpms
I build.
I too am interested and would like to try it. I have never used
anything beyond the vendor supplied version of Postfix but am tired of
waiting
lis...@newnanutilities.org (Brian Collins) writes:
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where to
get RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
Simon Mudd picks up the releases and makes good source and binary RPMs from
them with lots of options. However, he's a busy man and
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 08:38:54PM +0200, Simon J Mudd wrote:
Others ask why not build from source. The simplicity of a single upgrade
procedure and reproducibility make this more favourable the more boxes
you have to manage. For those of us who have hundres of boxes to manage
this makes life
I'll see if I can make some time to build some 2.6 rpms, but am likely
to respond more if there are people who show an interest in these
rpms I build.
[DH] +1 for interest. I have begun building mail servers on multiple
VPS's using CentOS and I use your RPM's all the time. I'd be very
On Tue, May 19, 2009 6:41 am, Dan Horne wrote:
I'll see if I can make some time to build some 2.6 rpms, but am likely
to respond more if there are people who show an interest in these rpms I
build.
[DH] +1 for interest. I have begun building mail servers on multiple
VPS's using CentOS
Victor Duchovni wrote:
Yes, some of the better distribution supported patches are not ill-advised.
But occasionally, one gets something along the lines of the Debian OpenSSL
fiasco (notably the Debian *Postfix* patches have been pretty good, and
historically RedHat was adding rather
MacShane, Tracy wrote:
Yes, there is unfortunately such a need, because RHEL5 is only up to
Postfix 2.3, and we require functionality from Postfix 2.5 and up
(destination_rate_delay).
This leads to an interesting question all its own:
I'm running the same Postfix config I built years
On Thursday, 14. Mai 2009 09:54:56 Corey Chandler wrote:
MacShane, Tracy wrote:
snip
The OS administrators do not permit GCC and
devel libraries on the SMTP servers I maintain (and fair enough).
Nor should they-- this is what a staging environment is for. Build it
on a staging box, test
2009/5/14 Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com:
If the purpose of using RPM files is to facilitate binary updates from
distribution servers, wait until *your distribution* upgrades to a newer
supported version of Postfix.
If you incorporate your own Postfix into your O/S, why
On May 14, 2009, at 02:03, Victor Duchovni wrote:
Is there a real use case for binary RPMs not maintained by the
distribution release engineering teams? What's wrong with the Postfix
source, which is typically less likely to have ill-advised patches
dropped into it?
A bit off topic already
Hi,
On May 14, 2009, at 01:07, Just E. Mail wrote:
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where
to get RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
The SRPM from Fedora should compile fine on at least EL4 and EL5. I
suggest you download it and build it yourself instead of
On May 14, 2009, at 12:25, Barney Desmond wrote:
Sure; as people have already said, some vendors (cough, Redhat) don't
really keep up to date. I haven't checked all their release channels
on offer, but the core set of packages only includes Postfix 2.3.3.
*And* it doesn't come with mysql/pgsql
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where to
get RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
Simon Mudd picks up the releases and makes good source and binary RPMs from
them with lots of options. However, he's a busy man and does not always get
to them right after release. A
Is there a real use case for binary RPMs not maintained by the
distribution release engineering teams? What's wrong with the Postfix
source, which is typically less likely to have ill-advised patches
dropped into it?
Because those of us who run package-based systems find things work better
* Brian Collins lis...@newnanutilities.org:
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where to
get RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
Simon Mudd picks up the releases and makes good source and binary RPMs from
them with lots of options. However, he's a busy man and does
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Brian Collins lis...@newnanutilities.org:
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where to
get RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
Simon Mudd picks up the releases and makes good source and binary RPMs from
them with lots of options. However, he's a
Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
Sorry to hear that but in the mean time you can grab .src.rpm for a
prior release, the tarball for the current release and modify the
.spec file to reflect this.
I've been doing this for our smtp servers for some time. The suse
factory postfix srpm compiles nicely
Didn't get the message you replied to, so I'm bolting it on to yours.
mouss wrote:
Stefan Jakobs a écrit :
On Thursday, 14. Mai 2009 09:54:56 Corey Chandler wrote:
MacShane, Tracy wrote:
Also,
installing non-RPM packages can obviously cause clashes when installing
other RH
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where to
get RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
Jennifer
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 04:07:39PM -0600, Just E. Mail wrote:
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where to get
RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
If the purpose of using RPM files is to facilitate binary updates from
distribution servers, wait until *your distribution*
Victor Duchovni:
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 04:07:39PM -0600, Just E. Mail wrote:
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where to get
RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
If the purpose of using RPM files is to facilitate binary updates from
distribution servers, wait
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 07:26:34PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where to get
RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
If the purpose of using RPM files is to facilitate binary updates from
distribution servers, wait until *your
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
[mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Victor Duchovni
Sent: Thursday, 14 May 2009 9:04 AM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Postfix-2.6.0 RPM
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 04:07:39PM -0600, Just E. Mail
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 04:07:39PM -0600, Just E. Mail wrote:
I noticed that Postfix V#2.6.0 is now out. Does anybody know where to get
RPM files? GOOGLE did not help.
If the purpose of using RPM files is to facilitate binary updates from
distribution
Not only am I not competent to install Postfix, I should learn to type.
34 matches
Mail list logo
