Jens Rehsack wrote:
> John Baldwin wrote:
> > First, core@ is not the appropriate body for that type of request.
> > Both current@ and arch@ are much better targets. Second, is
> > NO_SENDMAIL + the postfix port inadequate?
>
> The problem I see with that is, that even a minimalistic base install
> installs things like sendmail, ppp, atm-stuff, g77 and so on.
>
> I really think splitting the base in some sub-parts would it make much
> easier to do NO_SENDMAIL on my own. So I had to remove each not required
> file separately. That's no good solution.
So we are back to:
o breaking the base system into packages,
o either pre-installed with package alternatives to
allow deinstall and reinstall, OR
o we are into seperately packaging all mail servers,
picking the current one as default, and hacking the
heck out of sysinstall to make sure there's a seperate
choice item to get one installed
...all so that programs that require the ability to send local
mail, many of them base systems components, can function.
That's what I said in the first place.
So we are agreed.
The correct mailing lists for this discussion are [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've set followups to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to indicate my own
bias and the total lack of space for more sysinstall code on the
install floppy...
-- Terry
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
