Re: Mutt dependency on an MTA
On Fri, Jul 30, 1999 at 08:59:08PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Jul 1999, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> > I don't feel strongly enough about this topic to reply to each of your
> > points. I agree that some MUAs (specifically pine and netscape) are
> > operable without a local MTA. I do not see that this warrants any
> > action ie modification of packages. For most users, an MTA is required.
>
> This actually is the definition of Recommends:, not Depends:. A Depends:
> is something that IN ALL CASES the lack of will cripple the dependent
> package, something that we both agree won't happen across the board for
> all MUAs.
Technically correct. However, I feel that the relationship is stronger
than Recommends.
> Okay, make it Required--making it a Depends: on a possibly Extra package
> in that case is ludicrous. BTW you're right--a *nix without a MTA is
> crippled, I just don't see a MUA without a local MTA as crippled.
Then is there an issue?
> > I don't see how having an MTA installed unnecessarily adds an
> > additional point of failure; pine and netscape store their mail in
> > private directories, so damage to /var/spool/mail would be inconsequential.
>
> I didn't say it was an additional point of failure, I said that it was a
Well, you did say
Who benefits now? A MTA that requires, ohhhh say PERL for example, could
actually nuke the entire mailing system on an upgrade, removing both the
If you think pine should not depend on mail-transport-agent, then file
a bug report. mutt DOES require one for sending mail, and it does
depend on mail-transport-agent.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB (ex-VK3TYD).
CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome.
Reply to: