[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#510415: tech-ctte: Qmail inclusion (or not) in Debian

On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 08:32:20AM +0000, Gerrit Pape wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 12:38:11AM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> >   * For each such criticism, what your opinion of it is and what
> >     if anything you plan to do about it.

> (3) How the suggested packages handle the 'newaliases' program
> (Steve)

> My opinion on

> (3) I was of the opinion that a dependency chain to a packages that
> provides the newliases program is enough to conform with the Debian
> policy, and, since Recommends are install by default, recommending the
> fastforward package is sufficient, while preserving flexibility.  I now
> see that on systems where exim is installed as default MTA, installing
> the fastforward package will result in a file conflict.  The packages
> should be adapted, so that the qmail-run package provides the newaliases
> program.

Actually, with the first set of packages uploaded to ftp-master in April
2008, the qmail-run package included a minimal newaliases program (doing
nothing but output a warning).  The fastforward package, if installed,
diverted and replaced the newaliases program with a full functional
version, giving users the choice.  AFAICS this was compliant with our
policy, but rejected by ftpmasters[*].  I chose to follow ftpmasters'
suggestion back then.

Would reverting this change concerning newaliases be acceptable for you,
and solve the newaliases-issue?

[*] http://smarden.org/pape/Debian/1215531259.4854_332.werc

Is there generally any (maybe invisible) progress on this bug's topic?

Thanks, Gerrit.

Reply to: