From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Jan 13 18: 0:58 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B62B537B401 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:00:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.au.darkbluesea.com (mail.au.darkbluesea.com [203.185.208.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 183C843E4A for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:00:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from d.anker@au.darkbluesea.com) Received: (qmail 15075 invoked by uid 82); 14 Jan 2003 01:56:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.188?) (10.0.0.188) by cam.au.darkbluesea.com with SMTP; 14 Jan 2003 01:56:38 -0000 Subject: Re: Postfix vs. Sendmail From: Duncan Anker To: FreeBSD Questions In-Reply-To: <20030113105248.GM1196@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> References: <20030105134445.H96646-100000@dean.goepp.net> <447kdiz6f1.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> <1041897164.11871.21.camel@duncan.au.darkbluesea.com> <20030110130358.GN1196@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> <1042414738.1458.6.camel@duncan.au.darkbluesea.com> <20030113105248.GM1196@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Dark Blue Sea Message-Id: <1042509668.1458.329.camel@duncan.au.darkbluesea.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.0 Date: 14 Jan 2003 12:01:08 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 2003-01-13 at 20:52, Roman Neuhauser wrote: > # d.anker@au.darkbluesea.com / 2003-01-13 09:38:58 +1000: > > This sounds like a different issue - my suggestion was for how to avoid > > putting sendmail into the system when you build it. > > not really a different issue. the OP wanted to be able to [not] > install Sendmail, Bind etc. during the initial system setup. that's > impossible ATM. Correct. However, once you have built your system and carefully removed the bits you don't want, you are likely to be quite unhappy for an upgrade to go and put them back. If you have run your system for a couple of years, then an "install" is really just upgrading versions. > plus, replacing part of the base with a port might > break your system. Making a typo in a configuration file, or deleting a library might break your system too. The original question was not about ensuring the integrity of a port. Breaking the system by leaving out part of the base is a concern though. > > Neither makes your suggestion "exactly what you want". My suggestion was taken from a scenario where you are installing, for example, 4.7 onto a box that has previously been running something like 4.3 or 4.4. > > > Admittedly, after a default install it's already there and you have to > > go and remove it, so yes, there should be an installer option for it. > > and yes, that's what the OP wanted. And I agree. It would be much easier not to install things in the first place. How much dependency is there still on these things within the base system? What would break if someone with no *NIX experience installed FreeBSD without Sendmail or BIND? If they can be taken out, all well and good. I believe dependency on Perl has been removed in version 5.0 so that it can be relegated back to the ports - and what a hue and cry there was over that, removing an "essential" tool from the base system. > > If you need to start sendmail after DJB dnscache, you can disable it in > > /etc/rc.conf and start it from a local script, no? > > yes. that means you must do more than you said originally, and what > you said originally is not "exactly what you want". Are you suggesting that you should be able modify the default install without modifiying the default configuration? That's a mighty fine sentiment, but I can't see it happening. In any case, the port should really take care of the local script if it's needed, and anything needed to be done should be included in the ubiquitous INSTALL file. Now, if the OP had asked "How do I prevent Sendmail from complaining because it starts up before DJB dnscache?" then the whole scenario you brought up would be related. However, he didn't, so I stand by my assertion that this is a different issue, although you are correct that what I suggested is not exactly what he wants. I think the real trouble is that people usually don't ask for exactly what they want, and everyone has completely different inferences of it. I have no intention of offending anyone, nor starting a flame war, so I will now cease participation in this thread as it is getting off-topic. Regards, Duncan Anker -- The information contained in this email is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information in this email in any way. Dark Blue Sea does not guarantee the integrity of any emails or attached files. The views or opinions expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or opinions of Dark Blue Sea. Dark Blue Sea does not warrant that any attachments are free from viruses or other defects. You assume all liability for any loss, damage or other consequences which may arise from opening or using the attachments. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message