On Jul 06, Alexander Vlasov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But I have some objections:
> 1) first reason is not true anymore. Since
> 2004 SPF has a lot of testing;
Which showed well that it is a bad idea.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Alexander Vlasov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> AFAIK, debian maintainers are volunteers and they became maintainers to
> make Debian better. What the reason for maintainer to _reject_
> improvements?
Another reason is this one:
# Compiling Exim with experimental features. These are documented
Le jeudi 06 juillet 2006 à 18:03 +0300, Alexander Vlasov a écrit :
> b) default exim with spf and lot of people just enabling it in config
> (rest of exim users wouldn't notice the difference)
> ?
>
> AFAIK, debian maintainers are volunteers and they became maintainers to
> make Debian better. Wha
Hello.
Well, rebuilding a package is not a problem;
I already have about ~ 70 packages rebuilt for various reasons; It's not
a problem to add another one.
But I'm trying to make things as comfortable as possible for all.
What is better:
a) default exim w/o spf and lot of people using local instal
Take matters into your own hands. :)
The following is what I used to do to run exim4 4.50 with SPF checking.
I think that the same broad steps will also apply to more recent versions
of the package.
# apt-get install build-essential libspf2-dev fakeroot
# apt-get build-dep exim4
$ apt-get sour
On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 09:53:11PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> >So, why can't this be done without an exim4-config package in Debian, with
> >something like the following arrangement:
> > exim4-daemon
> > provides/conflicts: mail-transport-agent
> > postinst:
> >
On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 03:29:31 +1000, Anthony Towns
wrote:
>So, why can't this be done without an exim4-config package in Debian, with
>something like the following arrangement:
>
> exim4-daemon
> provides/conflicts: mail-transport-agent
> postinst:
>
On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 10:09:04AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> For example, the place I work has a package exim4-config-ilkserver
> based on exim4-config-medium. That package installs without debconf
> questions and contains a configuration that is suitable to our
> non-main servers. It, for example
* Tollef Fog Heen
> It also makes it possible for packages such as clamav, spamassassin
> and mailman to seamlessly drop in support in a fairly clean way.
Which (possibly) makes the configuration break in a whole new way, if
you decide to actually change the logic of stuff inside conf.d/.
Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 05:46:30PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
>> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 13:43:39 +1000, Anthony Towns
>> wrote:
>>> The one that gets installed later, Pre-Deps the one that gets installed
>>> earlier. exim4-daemon Pre-Depends: exim4-config; exim4-config Depends:
>
On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 01:05:24 +1000, Anthony Towns
wrote:
>On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 10:34:45AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> > Seriously, I think you need to reconsider having the configuration in
>> > a separate package.
>> > What're you trying to achieve exactly?
>> Allowing for different configur
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 10:34:45AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Seriously, I think you need to reconsider having the configuration in
> > a separate package.
> > What're you trying to achieve exactly?
> Allowing for different configuration mechanismn. And I (as a user of
> exim4) like that very
* Tore Anderson
| * Marc Haber
|
| > The way -config does the configuration is something that is questioned
| > by a lot of people. Most conservative eximists hate the configuration
| > being split out in several files,
|
| Absolutely, this is a slight convenience for the packagers which c
* Anthony Towns (aj@azure.humbug.org.au) [031206 08:10]:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 05:46:30PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 13:43:39 +1000, Anthony Towns
> > wrote:
> > >The one that gets installed later, Pre-Deps the one that gets installed
> > >earlier. exim4-daemon Pre-Depends
On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 22:22:07 +0100, Tore Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Marc Haber
>> Splitting up the config file in small files was necessary to do
>> debconf support, which is a Debian requirement.
> Debconf support is now required? I'm flabbergasted. Could you
> please point me
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 05:46:30PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 13:43:39 +1000, Anthony Towns
> wrote:
> >The one that gets installed later, Pre-Deps the one that gets installed
> >earlier. exim4-daemon Pre-Depends: exim4-config; exim4-config Depends:
> >exim4-base, probably.
> Un
On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 19:24:28 +0100, Marc Haber
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 13:43:39 +1000, Anthony Towns
> wrote:
>>Maybe an easy way of answering that is to instead answer this: why can't
>>you just make the -config package a bunch of files and a script that
>>doesn't get execut
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 13:43:39 +1000, Anthony Towns
wrote:
>The one that gets installed later, Pre-Deps the one that gets installed
>earlier. exim4-daemon Pre-Depends: exim4-config; exim4-config Depends:
>exim4-base, probably.
Unfortunately, that doesn't work. apt immediately bombs out with "E:
Inte
* Tore Anderson
> * Andreas Metzler
>
> > Would you and Andreas seriously consider modifying the Exim packages
> > to the layout I suggested in my former post? If so, I would be happy
> > to spend some time developing a patch for this purpose.
Apologies for this misattribution, I was
* Andreas Metzler
> Would you and Andreas seriously consider modifying the Exim packages
> to the layout I suggested in my former post? If so, I would be happy
> to spend some time developing a patch for this purpose.
* Andreas Metzler
> No, I am sorry (and thanks for the offer). You effec
Tore Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Marc Haber
> > The source package holds infrastructure for three possibilities:
> >
> > - A script is included that splits out -config source from the source
> > package, allowing the debconf stuff to be modified independently
> > - A script is includ
Tore Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Marc Haber
> > Splitting up the config file in small files was necessary to do
> > debconf support, which is a Debian requirement.
> Debconf support is now required? I'm flabbergasted. Could you
> please point me to this section of our policy? I ce
* Marc Haber
> Splitting up the config file in small files was necessary to do
> debconf support, which is a Debian requirement.
* Tore Anderson
> Debconf support is now required? I'm flabbergasted.
* Joey Hess
> debconf support is a requirement if you want to be supported
> (reconfig
Tore Anderson wrote:
> > Splitting up the config file in small files was necessary to do
> > debconf support, which is a Debian requirement.
>
> Debconf support is now required? I'm flabbergasted.
debconf support is a requirement if you want to be supported
(reconfigured) by base-config, whi
* Marc Haber
> Splitting up the config file in small files was necessary to do
> debconf support, which is a Debian requirement.
Debconf support is now required? I'm flabbergasted. Could you
please point me to this section of our policy? I certainly cannot
find it.
* Tore Anderson
>
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 13:43:39 +1000, Anthony Towns
wrote:
>Maybe an easy way of answering that is to instead answer this: why can't
>you just make the -config package a bunch of files and a script that
>doesn't get executed until the daemon package is installed?
That's a nice idea. The -base init s
On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 10:20:16 +0100, Tore Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>* Marc Haber
> > Well, I am only paid to work on the exim4 package if my employer gets
> > to use the package as well. Since we don't want debconf questions to
> > pop up during installation and we found the pre-fabricate
* Tore Anderson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031203 23:55]:
> * Marc Haber
> > The way -config does the configuration is something that is questioned
> > by a lot of people. Most conservative eximists hate the configuration
> > being split out in several files,
> Absolutely, this is a slight conven
* Marc Haber
> Well, I am only paid to work on the exim4 package if my employer gets
> to use the package as well. Since we don't want debconf questions to
> pop up during installation and we found the pre-fabricated -config too
> inflexible for our needs, -config needs to be split out.
So
On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:29:22 +0100, Tore Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>* Marc Haber
>> The way -config does the configuration is something that is questioned
>> by a lot of people. Most conservative eximists hate the configuration
>> being split out in several files,
>Absolutely, this is a
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 08:37:06PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> >the other
> >is to ensure that exim4-base (and config) is "configured" first, which
> >can be done by having them not have a postinst script. That mightn't be
> >good enough.
> Both -base and -config have non-trivial postinst scripts.
* Marc Haber
> The way -config does the configuration is something that is questioned
> by a lot of people. Most conservative eximists hate the configuration
> being split out in several files,
Absolutely, this is a slight convenience for the packagers which causes
a major inconvenience to
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 04:21:55 +1000, Anthony Towns
wrote:
>I'm going to ignore the -config package, since it's not really part of
>the problem.
Is it?
>Okay, so you want to say:
>
> * any exim4-daemon package should only be installed when exim4-base
> is already installed and setup
>
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 05:49:20PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> exim4 is a metapackage that depends on the other three and is not hit by
> the problem. The rest is a straighforward chain.
>
> daemon -->-- -base -->-- -config.
> other possible dependencies would be:
> daemon -->-- -config -->--
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 02:15:30AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 04:41:00PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
>> as co-maintainer for the exim4-packages, I have noticed an issue with
>> dselect. Currently, exim4 is the default MTA, and exim4, exim4-base,
>> exim4-config and exim4-dae
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 04:41:00PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> as co-maintainer for the exim4-packages, I have noticed an issue with
> dselect. Currently, exim4 is the default MTA, and exim4, exim4-base,
> exim4-config and exim4-daemon-light are Priority: important, while
> exim4-daemon-light provid
36 matches
Mail list logo
