Re: jessie release goals
On 2013-05-13 13:01:27 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Vincent Lefevre
>
> > On 2013-05-12 18:51:10 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > ]] Vincent Lefevre
> > > > But not for postfix, which can reject mail by default without an
> > > > initial configuration. Since it is not working by default, and loses
> > > > mail, the daemon shouldn't be enabled by default.
> > >
> > > IIRC, postfix defaults to local mail only, listening on localhost only,
> > > so how it would reject mail by default, I'm not sure?
> >
> > According to the history of my config files, this was not the case
> > on my Debian machine where I installed postfix. This may depend on
> > the answers to some questions at install time (there is something
> > like that for exim, I don't remember for postfix), but in such a
> > case, I answered according to my use of postfix.
>
> So you configured it through debconf, in a non-default way, and it
> refused mails according to how you configured it.
AFAIK, debconf is the *only* choice. Perhaps debconf has a way
to use the default configuration, but that's also bad (and even
worse, since more mail could be rejected) as by default, postfix
listens on all interfaces:
inet_interfaces (default: all)
> I don't see what the postfix package should have done differently
> here. It would be more confusing for it to ask you about how it
> should handle mail and then just not handle mail for you after that.
It could have asked: Do you want me to start the postfix daemon now,
or wait after some additional manual configuration? Do this or that
to start the daemon.
Answering something like "local mail" would be wrong, as a manual
update of the config file from, say, "loopback-only" to "all" could
be overwritten after an upgrade of the package. I don't know about
postfix, but something like that happened to me with exim.
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
Reply to: