--
On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 05:51, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 10:23:26AM +0000, Philip Hazel wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Andreas Metzler wrote:
---snip---
> I am going to think about trying get a hardcoded uid for exim:exim
> reserved on Debian.
no... No... NOOOOO...
If you do that Andreas, it'll break the transparency of MTA changeout in
Debian... I make systems for other people with Debian's set
guidelines... if they want exim/sendmail/qmail/smail/courier/etc... They
all use the same uid:gid... I have even enforced this on my RedHat
machines, Mandrake Machines and so on... It make life a bit easier, when
I enforce Debian Policy on the builds of machines I make and maintain
but can't be Debian due to "Officially Supported" on RedHat, SuSE,
Mandrake or Gentoo etc...
> > I want to get a new, fully documented release out in a few
> > weeks' time, and the documentation itself needs a lot of work.
>
> I won't stop repeating that imho one of exim's greatest favours is its
> documentation. ;-) Thanks.
Egads... even when I don't think the answer is in the spec.txt... it
is.(99.99% of the time), considering exim has more feature than I can
shake a stick at... and still manage to get my arms around it... quite
an accomplishment.
<rant>
Now, Philip can you finally implement the
"fix_remote_idiotic_broken_arsed_SMTP_agents" main option? Rather than
having to deal with so many "special cases" (for instance the "_" or no
waiting for responses, etc)...
</rant>
--
greg, greg@???
REMEMBER ED CURRY!
http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry
Your eyebrows are as verdantly forrested as the seeded woodworms of my
most sombre dreams.
--
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[ signature.asc of type application/pgp-signature deleted ]
--
