Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 20 Apr 2002 09:57:13 -0700
From:      Gregory Neil Shapiro <gshapiro@FreeBSD.ORG>
To:        hawkeyd@visi.com
Cc:        freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: /etc/defaults/rc.conf theory
Message-ID:  <15553.40425.490351.72629@horsey.gshapiro.net>
In-Reply-To: <20020419225859.B10089@sheol.localdomain>
References:  <20020419225855.E7E575D05_ptavv.es.net@ns.sol.net> <20020419181021.X18267-100000_zoot.corp.yahoo.com@ns.sol.net> <200204200256.g3K2uOu10038@sheol.localdomain> <20020420111130.C6261@brel.com> <20020419224846.A10089@sheol.localdomain> <15552.58959.247799.490618@horsey.gshapiro.net> <20020419225859.B10089@sheol.localdomain>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> I have reverted the sendmail_enable part of the /etc mega-mfc so once
>> again, sendmail_enable defaults to YES as it always has in RELENG_4
>> (-STABLE).

hawkeyd> And Doug is OK with it (i.e., doesn't that fly against his "everything
hawkeyd> off" approach"?)? If he is, then y'all are already at the edge of the
hawkeyd> proverbial slippery slope to regression, no?

Doug's commit was to reduce diffs to -HEAD but it had a side effect that
wasn't mentioned anywhere.  If the decision is made to turn off all network
services for 4.6 and both UPDATING and the release notes are updated to
warn users ahead of time, I'm perfectly happy to change this back.
However, the current situation of an undocumented side effect of the MFC
was unacceptable in my opinion.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15553.40425.490351.72629>