Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 09:59:09 +0100 From: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" <karsten@rohrbach.de> To: Helge Oldach <helge.oldach@atosorigin.com> Cc: Yeasah Pell <yeasah@apocalypse.org>, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: HEADS UP: sendmail 8.12.2 MFC'ed Message-ID: <20020327095909.C35734@mail.webmonster.de> In-Reply-To: <200203270836.JAA29261@galaxy.de.cp.philips.com>; from helge.oldach@atosorigin.com on Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 09:36:19AM %2B0100 References: <026501c1d561$90d61de0$0200a8c0@gauss> <200203270836.JAA29261@galaxy.de.cp.philips.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--JgQwtEuHJzHdouWu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
no text deleted, everything quoted, not reformatted, no information
removed. please, read on.
Helge Oldach(helge.oldach@atosorigin.com)@2002.03.27 09:36:19 +0000:
> Yeasah Pell:
> >The question is
> >simply this: why are there large, complex, non-BSD packages in src-contr=
ib
> >that are not critical to the running of many types of systems, and not
> >strictly a dependency of the system proper?
>=20
> Because they always have been. BSD users (those who have been running
> BSD systems for *years* and not those who jumped on the wagon lately) do
> expect that a decent, full-function MTA and DNS server are on board by
> default. And further they expect that those beasts are being configured
> as they have always been configured, in other words: No learning curve,
> no additional installation of the ports.
if you consider doing
cd /usr/ports/whereever && make install clean
as steep learning curve, i guess you disqualify yourself in this very
forum.
> This BSD thing is about tradition. "Alternative" software is what the
> word says: It's about re-inventing the wheel. This is the Linux spirit.
wrong, it is called evolution, a natural way of things evolving which
does not stop just because somebody puts up a sign "this is bsd, we do
it this way since 1970 and it won't change in the future". this has
nothing to do with linux at all. it is also not about re-inventing the
wheel. you seem to mix up the terms "tradition" and "religion" here,
introducing an implicit amount of folklore, hoping that it will support
your nonexistant line of argumentation.
define:
- "this bsd thing"
- "linux spirit"
when it comes to tradition, i cannot remember a single freebsd
distribution which natively supports to be booted from tape. running bsd
on pc hardware does not have anything to do with tradition.
another point is that, if the community would stick to your way of
"tradition", freebsd nowadays would run on laptop computers (why
support pcmcia/cardbus? it's not been there in the 70's, so why should
we bother to implement it today?).
do i need to go on?
> >The suggestion that moving sendmail or bind into the ports tree is
> >tantamount to doing the same to vi is interesting, but I see a major
> >difference between the two: I can hardly contrive an example where vi
> >wouldn't be useful to have, whereas I have actually encountered many cas=
es
> >in my work where a DNS server and an MTA are both unwanted and even need=
ed
> >to be removed due to constraints unrelated to name resolution or mail
> >transport.
>=20
> I have the exactly opposite experience. Most of my systems need at least
> an outbound-only MTA, and it's much easier to add a single rc.conf
> line than to build a port, set aside installing the entire ports tree
> first. (Yes, I have a couple of machines without ports tree. Consider,
> for instance firewalls or VPN gateways.) Moving it into ports will
> complicate matters for almost everybody, while having some decent
> full-function package in the base system will make it easy at least for
> those who use that.
generally, you make a point here.=20
to come back to your original thought, do you consider having sendmail=20
on a firewall a good thing[tm]? sell that to your customers and prove me=20
that you do this successfully. this, just as a sidenote.
as another sidenote, nobody prevents you from building a package
yourself on a machine having a ports tree installed. these systems are
known as "builder" machines, and most of the folks in the bsd community
having more than just a handful of machines operate one. just to build
their custom packages. you don't have many machines in the field, have
you? this question just out of curiosity.
> Count this my strong vote against removal of packages that are
> traditionally part of the base system.
>
> Helge
/k
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
--=20
> If you think sex is a pain in the ass, try a different position.
KR433/KR11-RIPE -- WebMonster Community Founder -- nGENn GmbH Senior Techie
http://www.webmonster.de/ -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de/ -- http://www.ngenn.n=
et/
GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 B=
F46
My mail is GnuPG signed -- Unsigned ones are bogus -- http://www.gnupg.org/
Please do not remove my address from To: and Cc: fields in mailing lists. 1=
0x
--JgQwtEuHJzHdouWu
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE8oYndM0BPTilkv0YRAhP/AJ0Q49uQaLlW0IR8DEmIuKv0SoJ3FQCgnGPb
CkgkEW0i9XPwxNiwDdP4sa8=
=BQTx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--JgQwtEuHJzHdouWu--
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?20020327095909.C35734>