Re: Bug Terrorism

1998-06-17 Thread Herbert Xu
Brian White wrote: > severity 23000 normal > -- > > > The reason that sendmail broke is that you made a DELIBERATE modification > > to procmail that sendmail wasn't expecting. While I agree that sendmail > > should probably be more graceful about handling it, it is not a > > release-critical erro

Re: Bug Terrorism

1998-06-17 Thread Herbert Xu
Scott Ellis wrote: > No, you're not hiding this on the bug tracking system any more. Neither are you. > The reason that sendmail broke is that you made a DELIBERATE modification > to procmail that sendmail wasn't expecting. While I agree that sendmail That's just simply true. If you have a sho

Re: Bug Terrorism

1998-06-16 Thread Brian White
severity 23000 normal -- > The reason that sendmail broke is that you made a DELIBERATE modification > to procmail that sendmail wasn't expecting. While I agree that sendmail > should probably be more graceful about handling it, it is not a > release-critical error. A vast majority of people (li

Re: Bug Terrorism

1998-06-16 Thread Jens Ritter
Scott Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > No, you're not hiding this on the bug tracking system any more. > Come on, cool down! That´s a bad way to get this resolved. Please DON´T do that again. I think -private would have been more apropriate. I know everybody is getting nervous in this deep f