; Crap. If all we had to do was to change the name, then qmail would've been
; part of Debian ages ago and we wouldn't have spent the huge amount of
; effort
; to convert our main server away from qmail. Read this from
; http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html:
yes, that was an assumption on my part. My apologies.
; And if you still think this is OK, well just ask yourself what a
; distributor can do when the next security hole comes along and Dan is
; not in a position of releasing a patch (on a safari trip, perhaps?).
_next time_ ? There has never been a security hole in any of Dan's
software to the best of my knowledge and he regularly offers cash
rewards at their release for any found. However, for the sake of
argument, let's assume a security hole is found.
In that event, simple -- I'd probably hit www.qmail.org where there is
a wealth of knoweldge, users and patches. Note in particular
'User-Contributed Software for Qmail'. There is nothing stopping
somebody writing a patch that others can obtain and apply to the
official source distribution -- a simple patch; make and make install
would probably solve the problem. When Dan returns from his
hypothetical safari, he would probably decide whether or not to include
it in the next release (which are very few and far between I might
add).
Your scenario isn't really a big deal.
r.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
