On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 03:48:32AM -0500, Brian Ashe wrote: > KM> postfix instead of sendmail > > Postfix also is not GPL. It is under the IBM Public License. If you > read it, you could see that there are certain provisions for > commercial distribution. While they wouldn't stop you from > distributing it, there are some interesting clauses that lawyers may > be able to use against someone. Though I would not know how chancy > that is, RH (and others) may have lawyers that recommend against it. Interesting. I didn't know postfix wasn't GPL. I suggested it because everyone would be better off if the configuration system of such an important service as mail was comprehensible by ordinary mortals, and if it were more secure by default. But yes, it should be GPL as well. Exim is GPL, and O'Reilly just released a comprehensive manual for it. What about that then?
My basic point was that much trouble could be avoided by using the best available software, rather than the status quo. Redhat has done this in the past even even when some pain has been involved, such as when it dumped inetd for xinetd. So why not get rid of sendmail and wu-ftpd? _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
