Le samedi 15 octobre 2011 à 09:53 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> Hear, hear. "How do I deliver mail?" is a per-system setting, not a
> per-application setting,
This is true for many enterprise deployments, but in the general case,
it is a per-user setting, not a per-system setting.
> and th
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:53:32 -0700, Steve Langasek
wrote:
>Hear, hear. "How do I deliver mail?" is a per-system setting, not a
>per-application setting, and the move towards having MUAs talking SMTP
>directly to send mail is a flawed model picked up on the Linux desktop from
>certain other OSes.
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:26:12AM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> standard, we should also not ship nfs-common, rpcbind, or libtirpc since
> NFS is used even less often than an MTA and the same rationale for not
> installing it applies.
Those seem like reasonable things to drop, though I don't t
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 07:20:54PM +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
> I think that the real question is: how much should Debian GNU/Linux
> mimic a standard UNIX system by default?
I think this is the real question. If standard is a default Unix
system, then it needs to have an MTA. I believe this eve
Le dimanche 16 octobre 2011 à 02:41 +0100, Ben Hutchings a écrit :
> > That's the main one that I'd worry about. Also overheating warnings, for
> > which even the home user can do something immediately.
>
> The user generally can't even read the warning in time to make a
> decision; the system m
Hi there!
Just some small notes without re-iterating what other people already
wrote in this (now too-long) thread.
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 10:26:06 +0200, Jonas Meurer wrote:
> Am 12.10.2011 23:39, schrieb Josh Triplett:
>> Not every system needs an MTA, and I'd argue that today most systems
>> don'
Hi there!
Disclaimer: I am not an SMTP expert.
On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 21:37:59 +0200, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Andrea Bolognani wrote:
>> The proxy one needs to go through to access the Internet from inside my
>> University buildings cuts off SMTP.
>
> Have you checked to see if it blocks SMTPS, or th
On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 at 16:09:50 +0100, Roger Lynn wrote:
> On 15/10/11 22:00, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Every ISP mailserver I've seen, and for that matter almost every other
> > mailserver I've seen, requires SMTP AUTH to send mail; the SMTP AUTH
> > credentials vary by user.
>
> I don't believe t
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 at 13:23:00 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Do you mean [...] the
> envelope icon Gnome3 adds that holds such important info like the last song
> that started playing (used to OSD for a couple of seconds), or that you got
> new mail (no matter it's already shown elsewhere, and the
On Sun, 16 Oct 2011, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 03:50:45PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > 1: I should note that I personally use a custom written nullmailer
> > plugin which uses ssh to connect to my central mail host and then
> > run /usr/lib/sendmail there... granted, that
Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> The proxy one needs to go through to access the Internet from inside my
> University buildings cuts off SMTP.
Have you checked to see if it blocks SMTPS, or the submission port?
The latter often gets through when port 25 won't, and SMTPS almost
always works.
- Josh Tripl
On 15/10/11 22:00, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Needing to send mail through specific per-user smarthosts is the exception,
> > not the rule. Most machines have a designated forwarding smarthost based on
> > who their ISP is, not based on which email address someone wants to us
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 03:50:45PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> 1: I should note that I personally use a custom written nullmailer
> plugin which uses ssh to connect to my central mail host and then run
> /usr/lib/sendmail there... granted, that's probably a little bit
> crazy, but it works great
On Oct 16, Don Armstrong wrote:
> 1: I should note that I personally use a custom written nullmailer
> plugin which uses ssh to connect to my central mail host and then run
> /usr/lib/sendmail there... granted, that's probably a little bit
> crazy, but it works great for my laptops which are ofte
On Sat, 2011-10-15 at 14:55 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Josselin Mouette writes:
>
> > Let me ask the question otherwise: what kind of information do you think
> > is important enough to show to all logged users immediately?
>
> If the system runs out of memory and starts up the OOM killer, it
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 08:34:52PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > The main reasons to stop having an MTA in standard:
>
> > - Starting a daemon at boot time, which slows down booting. This led me
> > to notice the problem in Debian Live: it took a non-trivial amount of
>
Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Oct 2011, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > If I want to send mail from my personal address I should send it
> > through my own smarthost. If I want to send mail from my work
> > address I *must* send it through the work smarthost (thanks to SPF).
> > I could possibly confi
Josh Triplett writes:
> As far as I know, Priority has the following non-cosmetic uses:
[...]
A couple more:
One and only one conflicting alternative provider of a particular
exclusive API or interface may have priority higher than extra according
to Policy, so priority forces us to pick a "wi
Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2011-10-15, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > MTAs would need to advance quite a bit to get anywhere near as usable as
> > a MUA that speaks SMTP, not least of which in error reporting. (Most of
> > the people I know who run local MTAs have had at least one "all my mail
> > got st
Adam Borowski writes:
> This is not about outside mail, it's about local mail that originates
> from the system itself, cron jobs and so on.
> And I seriously hope no one proposes to remove cron.
I think it's pretty obvious that we need some way of notifying people
about cron errors other than
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 12:59:58AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> On 10/15/11 22:06, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >Needing to send mail through specific per-user smarthosts is the exception,
> >not the rule. Most machines have a designated forwarding smarthost based on
> >who their ISP is, not based
Neil Williams wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 22:29:56 +0200
> Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Neil Williams (codeh...@debian.org) [111015 22:23]:
> > > The problem with "Standard" is that it is currently (and heavily) biased
> > > towards multi-user servers and most of the replies in this thread which
>
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> If I want to send mail from my personal address I should send it
> through my own smarthost. If I want to send mail from my work
> address I *must* send it through the work smarthost (thanks to SPF).
> I could possibly configure this at the MTA level, but
On 10/15/11 22:06, Steve Langasek wrote:
Needing to send mail through specific per-user smarthosts is the exception,
not the rule. Most machines have a designated forwarding smarthost based on
who their ISP is, not based on which email address someone wants to use.
The exception to which rule?
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 at 16:02:09 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > > End-user systems (desktops, laptops) typically handle mail via one
> > > or more smarthosts elsewhere, driven by MUAs that know how to talk
>
Joey Hess wrote:
> Josh Triplett wrote:
> > What would it take to make this change?
> >
> > I will happily work to coordinate this transition.
>
> For me this thread raises two interesting questions. The first is the one
> Josh asks above, which has not been answered. How do we make decisions
> a
On 2011-10-15, Josh Triplett wrote:
> MTAs would need to advance quite a bit to get anywhere near as usable as
> a MUA that speaks SMTP, not least of which in error reporting. (Most of
> the people I know who run local MTAs have had at least one "all my mail
> got stuck in a queue for one or more
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Let me ask the question otherwise: what kind of information do you think
> is important enough to show to all logged users immediately?
If the system runs out of memory and starts up the OOM killer, it would be
nice to find some way to give the user a dialog to let the
Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Neil Williams (codeh...@debian.org) [111015 22:23]:
> > The problem with "Standard" is that it is currently (and heavily) biased
> > towards multi-user servers and most of the replies in this thread which
> > decry the absence of an MTA would appear to come from those princ
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 22:29:56 +0200
Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Neil Williams (codeh...@debian.org) [111015 22:23]:
> > The problem with "Standard" is that it is currently (and heavily) biased
> > towards multi-user servers and most of the replies in this thread which
> > decry the absence of an MTA
Josh Triplett writes:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
>> Needing to send mail through specific per-user smarthosts is the
>> exception, not the rule. Most machines have a designated forwarding
>> smarthost based on who their ISP is, not based on which email address
>> someone wants to use.
> Every ISP
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 06:53:02PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > Hear, hear. "How do I deliver mail?" is a per-system setting, not a
> > > per-application setting,
>
> > It's not per-system, or even per-user.
>
> > If I want to send mail from my personal address I sho
* Neil Williams (codeh...@debian.org) [111015 22:23]:
> The problem with "Standard" is that it is currently (and heavily) biased
> towards multi-user servers and most of the replies in this thread which
> decry the absence of an MTA would appear to come from those principally
> concerned with serve
Le samedi 15 octobre 2011 à 10:50 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a
écrit :
> Well, if anything logs on emergency and alert levels, it is a bug if it is
> *not* important enough to pester all logged users immediately. It is an
> even more clearcut case.
Let me ask the question otherwise: wha
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 14:56:15 -0400
Joey Hess wrote:
> My other question comes from policy:
>
> `standard'
> These packages provide a reasonably small but not too limited
> character-mode system. This is what will be installed by default
> if the user doesn't s
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 08:34:52PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> The main reasons to stop having an MTA in standard:
> - Starting a daemon at boot time, which slows down booting. This led me
> to notice the problem in Debian Live: it took a non-trivial amount of
> time for the boot process t
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 06:33:14PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 09:53:32AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Hear, hear. "How do I deliver mail?" is a per-system setting, not a
> > per-application setting, and the move towards having MUAs talking SMTP
> > directly to sen
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 06:53:02PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Hear, hear. "How do I deliver mail?" is a per-system setting, not a
> > per-application setting,
> It's not per-system, or even per-user.
> If I want to send mail from my personal address I should send it through
> my own smartho
Jonas Meurer wrote:
> Thanks to Josh for starting this discussion. I think that you summarized
> most arguments very well in your mail.
Thank you for your very clear explanation of the issue, as well.
> Am 12.10.2011 23:39, schrieb Josh Triplett:
> > Not every system needs an MTA, and I'd argue t
Josh Triplett wrote:
> What would it take to make this change?
>
> I will happily work to coordinate this transition.
For me this thread raises two interesting questions. The first is the one
Josh asks above, which has not been answered. How do we make decisions
about the content of standard? How
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 09:53:32AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hear, hear. "How do I deliver mail?" is a per-system setting, not a
> per-application setting, and the move towards having MUAs talking SMTP
> directly to send mail is a flawed model picked up on the Linux desktop from
> certain oth
Steve Langasek wrote:
> "How do I deliver mail?" is a per-system setting, not a per-application
> setting, and the move towards having MUAs talking SMTP directly to send
> mail is a flawed model picked up on the Linux desktop from certain other
> OSes.
No, "How do I deliver mail?" represents a per
On Sat, 2011-10-15 at 09:53 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 04:02:09PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > > End-user systems (desktops, laptops) typically handle mail via one
> > > or more smarthosts elsewhere, driven by MUAs that kn
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 10:35:13AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:17:38 +0200, "Bernhard R. Link"
> wrote:
> ...
> > > - Taking time to download and install, which increases the time and
> > > bandwidth needed to install or upgrade a Debian system.
> >
> > Please drop the
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 04:02:09PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > End-user systems (desktops, laptops) typically handle mail via one
> > or more smarthosts elsewhere, driven by MUAs that know how to talk
> > SMTP.
> While this definitely is the current
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 12:46:50PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le samedi 15 octobre 2011 à 12:36 +0200, Adam Borowski a écrit :
> > > Hell no. I'd go as far as labelling it a severity:critical bug.
> >
> > Go ahead, reporting bugs doesn’t necessa
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 14 octobre 2011 à 11:32 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a
> écrit :
> > I seem to recall our super duper memory-bloated DEs were not even
> > warning the user when something was screaming blood murder on the
> > emergency, alert and cri
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 12:46:50PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le samedi 15 octobre 2011 à 12:36 +0200, Adam Borowski a écrit :
> > Hell no. I'd go as far as labelling it a severity:critical bug.
>
> Go ahead, reporting bugs doesn’t necessarily get people to give a fuck.
So "causes serious
Le samedi 15 octobre 2011 à 12:36 +0200, Adam Borowski a écrit :
> Hell no. I'd go as far as labelling it a severity:critical bug.
Go ahead, reporting bugs doesn’t necessarily get people to give a fuck.
> If some part of the system has something important to say, you need to tell
> it to the us
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 12:46:31AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 14 octobre 2011 à 11:32 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a
> écrit :
> > I seem to recall our super duper memory-bloated DEs were not even
> > warning the user when something was screaming blood murder on the
> > eme
On Sb, 15 oct 11, 10:26:06, Jonas Meurer wrote:
>
> Why not use tasksel for this? It should be easy to introduce a basic
> server task which contains things like default MTA, SSH server, etc.
> while a basic desktop task doesn't.
Actually there already exists a "Mail Server" task[1]. Not very use
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 at 16:02:09 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > End-user systems (desktops, laptops) typically handle mail via one
> > or more smarthosts elsewhere, driven by MUAs that know how to talk
> > SMTP.
>
> While this definitely is the current s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Thanks to Josh for starting this discussion. I think that you summarized
most arguments very well in your mail.
Am 12.10.2011 23:39, schrieb Josh Triplett:
> Not every system needs an MTA, and I'd argue that today most systems
> don't. End-user
On Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Josh Triplett wrote:
> End-user systems (desktops, laptops) typically handle mail via one
> or more smarthosts elsewhere, driven by MUAs that know how to talk
> SMTP.
While this definitely is the current state, it's not optimal. It would
be ideal to have an MTA like esmtp or s
Le vendredi 14 octobre 2011 à 11:32 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh a
écrit :
> I seem to recall our super duper memory-bloated DEs were not even
> warning the user when something was screaming blood murder on the
> emergency, alert and critical priorities in syslog until wheezy... That
> absu
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Paul Wise wrote:
> As someone who runs Debian on his smartphone, I completely agree with
> making an MTA optional.
Eh, it is not essential, just "standard". You want Debian standard to be
tailored for smartphone use? Isn't that a much better job done through a
Debian pure bl
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:57:29PM +0200, Frank Steinborn wrote:
> > Josh Triplett wrote:
> > > ...which produce output to somewhere other than a log file, in some
> > > scenario other than "being buggy and accidentally producing output", and
> > > which
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 14:05:34 +0200
"Bernhard R. Link" wrote:
> > My brother comes to mind -- he's pretty happy with Debian and if he
> > didn't know me it's _just_ possible that he'd have installed it himself,
> > but would have simply accepted every default. He uses icedove as his
> > MUA, poin
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Possibly. The system I booted Debian Live on also had no network
> connection. But either way, exim takes a non-zero amount of time to
Nowadays, you really need to properly setup non-networked systems
correctly, to avoid being pestered by timeouts. I
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Luca Capello wrote:
> > - Starting a daemon at boot time, which slows down booting. This led me
> > to notice the problem in Debian Live: it took a non-trivial amount of
> > time for the boot process to finish starting exim and move on.
>
> I experienced the same in the p
* Josh Triplett [111013 22:42]:
> > Then deinstall it.
>
> Every point you just stated applies equally well to every daemon we
> don't install by default; you haven't given any reason why an MTA needs
> to exist by default.
Those points are only there to make clear that your counter-arguments
(to
* Philip Hands [111014 11:50]:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:17:38 +0200, "Bernhard R. Link"
> wrote:
> > > - Taking time to download and install, which increases the time and
> > > bandwidth needed to install or upgrade a Debian system.
> >
> > Please drop the "upgrade". If you deinstall it there
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:17:38 +0200, "Bernhard R. Link"
wrote:
...
> > - Taking time to download and install, which increases the time and
> > bandwidth needed to install or upgrade a Debian system.
>
> Please drop the "upgrade". If you deinstall it there is no cost at
> upgrading.
I think the
> Am 2011-10-13 13:06:49, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 12:02:11PM +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
> > > On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 05:34:52 +0200, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > > > For most users, these questions will duplicate the process
> > > > they later go through to configur
> Michelle Konzack writes:
> Am 2011-10-13 12:13:56, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
>> The user will not be notified even if the daemons send a mail to
>> them. I don't think any of the desktops GUIs that we ship know
>> anything about the local mail queue unless explicitly configure
Hello Paul,
Am 2011-10-13 12:13:56, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> The user will not be notified even if the daemons send a mail to them.
> I don't think any of the desktops GUIs that we ship know anything
> about the local mail queue unless explicitly configured in an MUA, nor
> do they notify
Hello Josh Triplett,
Am 2011-10-13 13:06:49, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 12:02:11PM +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
> > On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 05:34:52 +0200, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > > For most users, these questions will duplicate the process
> > > they later go through
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:57:29PM +0200, Frank Steinborn wrote:
> Josh Triplett wrote:
> > ...which produce output to somewhere other than a log file, in some
> > scenario other than "being buggy and accidentally producing output", and
> > which expect end users to read their output, and which the
Josh Triplett wrote:
> ...which produce output to somewhere other than a log file, in some
> scenario other than "being buggy and accidentally producing output", and
> which expect end users to read their output, and which therefore expect
> that the end user has configured root's mail to go somewh
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:17:38AM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Josh Triplett [111013 05:51]:
> > Users can easily install an MTA; why do they need one *by default* on
> > every Debian system they install?
>
> Because the system is not in a useful state without. If you want to
> cripple you
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Doesn't popcon itself send reports by email? Meaning that 100% of all
> > reports from popcon have an MTA installed?
>
> No, popcon can also report through HTTP.
Ah... Very good. I stand corrected. And what's more, looking it
over it appears that
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 12:02:11PM +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 05:34:52 +0200, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Bjørn Mork wrote:
> >> Josh Triplett writes:
> >>> Have I missed any important points?
> >>
> >> You forgot to explain the upside, reason, why, gain, whatever.
> >
> > Re-r
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:13:47AM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Luca Capello wrote:
> > I disagree on that, according to popcon we have 19.27% of users has
> > postfix installed, which could mean that ~90% of users has an MTA
> > installed.
>
> Doesn't popcon itself send reports by email? Meaning t
Luca Capello wrote:
> I disagree on that, according to popcon we have 19.27% of users has
> postfix installed, which could mean that ~90% of users has an MTA
> installed.
Doesn't popcon itself send reports by email? Meaning that 100% of all
reports from popcon have an MTA installed?
Bob
signat
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 at 10:17:38 +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Josh Triplett [111013 05:51]:
> > Users can easily install an MTA; why do they need one *by default* on
> > every Debian system they install?
>
> Because the system is not in a useful state without. If you want to
> cripple your s
* Luca Capello [111013 12:02]:
> > - Starting a daemon at boot time, which slows down booting. This led me
> > to notice the problem in Debian Live: it took a non-trivial amount of
> > time for the boot process to finish starting exim and move on.
>
> I experienced the same in the past on non
Hi there!
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 05:34:52 +0200, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> Josh Triplett writes:
>>> Have I missed any important points?
>>
>> You forgot to explain the upside, reason, why, gain, whatever.
>
> Re-reading my original mail, you're right, I do seem to have missed
> c
On Do, Okt 13, 2011 at 00:41:43 (CEST), Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes:
>
>> What would it take to make this change?
>
> Changing the LSB. Or you need to keep the sendmail interface. Which is
> what mail-transport-agent provides.
Why does LSB need to be fulfilled in 'standard'?
--
* Josh Triplett [111013 05:51]:
> Users can easily install an MTA; why do they need one *by default* on
> every Debian system they install?
Because the system is not in a useful state without. If you want to
cripple your system, just deinstall it.
> The main reasons to stop having an MTA in stan
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:46:19 +0200
Luca Capello wrote:
> Hi there!
>
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 03:18:04 +0200, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > The 30-35% figure for users who have removed exim still make sense,
> > though, to the extent that popcon numbers for a package with priority >=
> > standard can ma
Hi there!
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 03:18:04 +0200, Josh Triplett wrote:
> The 30-35% figure for users who have removed exim still make sense,
> though, to the extent that popcon numbers for a package with priority >=
> standard can make sense.
>
> In any case, I didn't intend the popcon numbers as any
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:45 AM, Adam Borowski wrote:
> That would break their system as daemons have no way to notify the user
> something is wrong.
The user will not be notified even if the daemons send a mail to them.
I don't think any of the desktops GUIs that we ship know anything
about the
As someone who runs Debian on his smartphone, I completely agree with
making an MTA optional.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes:
>> What would it take to make this change?
>
> Changing the LSB. Or you need to keep the sendmail interface. Which is
> what mail-transport-agent provides.
lsb-core provides the LSB interface, and it has priority extra, not
standard. It already has a d
Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 02:39:13PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
>> Popcon shows that ~65-70% of Debian systems have exim4 installed.
>> 30-35% of users cared enough to remove exim, and another 7% or so seem to
>> have configured their systems to stop running it (at boot or oth
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 02:39:13PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Popcon shows that ~65-70% of Debian systems have exim4 installed.
> 30-35% of users cared enough to remove exim, and another 7% or so seem to
> have configured their systems to stop running it (at boot or otherwise)
> without actually
Josh Triplett writes:
> What would it take to make this change?
Changing the LSB. Or you need to keep the sendmail interface. Which is
what mail-transport-agent provides.
> Have I missed any important points?
You forgot to explain the upside, reason, why, gain, whatever.
> Would any other
87 matches
Mail list logo
