Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 18:27:09 -0800 From: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@komquats.com> To: karels@FreeBSD.org Cc: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: Sendmail deprecation ? Message-ID: <201712140227.vBE2R9e4011351@slippy.cwsent.com> In-Reply-To: Message from Mike Karels <karels@FreeBSD.org> of "Wed, 13 Dec 2017 20:02:54 -0600." <201712140202.vBE22stW041959@mail.karels.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <201712140202.vBE22stW041959@mail.karels.net>, Mike Karels writes: > > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 05:45:57PM -0800, Don Lewis wrote: > > > Not really silly. > > > It's silly to be in the default install on an arm board IMHO. > > > mcl > > Presumably dealing with this issue is one of the goals of turning base > into packages, and hopefully there can be different defaults for > different architectures or profiles. Removing just sendmail won't get > you much space back (especially if you just remove /usr/sbin/sendmail, > which is just a symlink to mailwrapper). A small arm board is more > likely to be single-purpose, but it's hard to guess what that purpose > might be. I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility of such a board > originating mail, though. Especially with meta-packages for desktop, mail server, FAMP (FreeBSD, Apache, MySQL, PHP), network infrastructure, and other general server, or whatever else. What comes to mind are RPM groupings Red Hat has. At $JOB we use HPSA. Packaged base would allow us to play better in this space too. -- Cheers, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> FreeBSD UNIX: <cy@FreeBSD.org> Web: http://www.FreeBSD.org The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201712140227.vBE2R9e4011351>