Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 23:12:53 +0300 (EEST) From: Adrian Penisoara <ady@warpnet.ro> To: Steve Price <sprice@hiwaay.net> Cc: patl@phoenix.volant.org, Matt Behrens <matt@megaweapon.zigg.com>, imap-uw@freebsd.ady.ro, FreeBSD ports <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: imap-uw security hole -- please update port Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980716230644.4014B-100000@ady.warpnet.ro> In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.3.96.980716124328.25445A-100000@fly.HiWAAY.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On Thu, 16 Jul 1998, Steve Price wrote: > # You absolutely do NOT want to make the pine port depend on the imap-uw > # port; nor do you want it to automatically install the IMAP and POP > # servers that are packaged with it. Either choice would severely tick > # off those of us who use any other IMAP/POP server package. (Also, > # remember, the pine client may be built and installed on machines that > # will never run a local IMAP or POP daemon.) > > Fair enough, I was just asking because if I'm going to be in > there anyway I might as well do this too if it was a desired > feature. NOTE: however I did say that if it were to be done > that it "would have to be conditionalized appropriately...". > By this I meant that it wouldn't act any different than it does > today unless you did something like this: > > # cd /usr/ports/mail/pine4 > # WANT_IMAP_TOOLS=yes make install I understood your point, but really Steve: Pine is the client, imap-uw is the server; there is seldomly the need to install them both at a time. And it's much easier to control & use them in separate ports (though there might appear some issues with the shared libraries -- libc-client for example). > > Steve > PS: I'm striving on finishing the Pine 4.00 port... Ady (@freebsd.ady.ro) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980716230644.4014B-100000>