Installed sendmail 8.11.0.NonTLS-7 (source i386)
Installed:
sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-7.dsc
to dists/woody/main/source/mail/sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-7.dsc
replacing sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-6.dsc
sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-7_i386.deb
to dists/woody/main/binary-i386/mail/sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-7.deb
replacing sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-6.deb
sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-7.tar.gz
to dists/woody/main/source/mail/sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-7.tar.gz
replacing sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-6.tar.gz
libmilter-dev_8.11.0.NonTLS-7_i386.deb
to dists/woody/main/binary-i386/devel/libmilter-dev_8.11.0.NonTLS-7.deb
sendmail-doc_8.11.0.NonTLS-7_i386.deb
to dists/woody/main/binary-i386/mail/sendmail-doc_8.11.0.NonTLS-7.deb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Format: 1.6
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 14:00:00 -0500
Source: sendmail
Binary: sendmail libmilter-dev sendmail-doc
Architecture: source i386
Version: 8.11.0.NonTLS-7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Richard A Nelson (Rick) <cowboy@debian.org>
Description:
libmilter-dev - The sendmail Mail Filter API (Milter) is designed to allow
sendmail - A powerful mail transport agent.
sendmail-doc - A powerful mail transport agent.
Closes: 70652 70717
Changes:
sendmail (8.11.0.NonTLS-7) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Drop support of 8.9.3 and 8.10.1. With 8.11.1 comming soon, I just
can't see continuing earlier stuff - need to get this in proposed-updates
I guess.
* Split into several .debs:
. sendmail binaries, cf, examples - everything required
. sendmail-doc documentation (cf.readme, op.{ps,txt}, faq, etc.)
. libmilter-dev .h and .a files required to build a Mail fILTER
* switch to libldap2,libdb2
. debian/control (build-dep on libdb2-dev)
. debian/rules
. debian/local/*.in
. closes #72519
* new files in /usr/share/doc/sendmail-doc
. $(BUILD_DIR)/libmilter/README
. $(BUILD_DIR)/smrsh/README
* new files in /usr/share/doc/sendmail
. debian/local/site.config.m4
. debian/local/autoconf.results
. debian/examples-milter
* SASL/TLS support now fully done with autoconf + local hacks
. debian/rules
. debian/local/{dis,en}able_tls
* make dh_installlogrotate conditional (noted by Thomas Viehmann)
. debian/rules
* added --group MAIL to every update-inetd so as to not muck with user
definitions (reported against 8.9.3-23, but I'm not fixing it there)
. debian/sendmail.postinst
. debian/sendmail.init.d
. closes #71172
* Correct bug in DBS (tar)
. closes #72061
* Update DBS to that of 2000-08-11
* SFIO is now *only* used in the sendmail binary (wasn't easy!)
. debian/rules, debian/local/site.config.m4.in
* Quiet errors moving /var/log/mail.* to /var/log/mail/
. debian/sendmail.postinst
. closes: #70652
* Update /etc/syslog-ng/syslog-ng.conf if it exists
and remove entries in /etc/logrotate.d/syslog-ng
problem noted by Andrew Shugg <andrew@neep.com.au>
NOTE: this is only done on on move of /var/log/mail.* -> /var/log/mail/
so if you've already been bitten, you'll have to this by hand ! This
is the only way I can see to make the move, but let the user change
things to his/her liking.
. debian/sendmail.postinst
* Add libmilter/README to /usr/share/doc/sendmail and reference it
in /usr/share/doc/libmilter-dev/README.Debian
* Bug updates
. Bug#70717: sendmail: broken nullclient handling
(reported against 8.9.3-23, fixed in non-shipped -24, not an issue here)
closes: #70717
Files:
8ebedec68ce37e80c98235c7780e984c 670 mail extra sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-7.dsc
9b00e338897b6241af1363ee11b2e92e 1463259 mail extra sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-7.tar.gz
8dad39577098c82db15ba24e3984b0ea 652556 mail extra sendmail_8.11.0.NonTLS-7_i386.deb
a33505a57a8bab53d30b57677824c372 542118 mail extra sendmail-doc_8.11.0.NonTLS-7_i386.deb
4670f741089938c6a1dfd4dfd8e04387 170582 mail extra libmilter-dev_8.11.0.NonTLS-7_i386.deb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iQCVAwUBOdJfT6VTksHk9ElFAQHAuAQAkwYuJ+Zd1LJwMMfsQeqK53Ub/7wv0paT
I4p9wbgkaWyFYzKZxHqgdYIDgyy7CZQrzQ15Ilkdyp0W3F96uHYn2CAnYq9LSzBF
Y5h3uhm3CBlLDLZwgXks7lZ1xGEg4zbbp4EyNNuHv3YX4fmbybgJpdVoea/Nz5s/
46ci5WuLNaI=
=YPaR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: