RFC: Sendmail deprecation ?

[Rodney W. Grimes]

> On 2017-12-11 02:55, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> > On 12/10/17 12:08, K. Macy wrote:
> >> On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 6:27 AM,  <freebsd.arch at clogic.com.ua> wrote:
> >>> On 2017-12-10 15:31, Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote:
> >>>> freebsd.arch at clogic.com.ua wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> Most users don't need a sandmail in base. As example, I always 
> >>>>> disable
> >>>>> sendmail and install dma for local use or postfix for mail servers. 
> >>>>> So I
> >>>>> can't understand, why I need do this every time as I install new
> >>>>> instance of FreeBSD in 2017?
> >>>> 
> >>>> There are many valid arguments for and against removal, but I'm 
> >>>> afraid
> >>>> that isn't one of them.
> >> That's not really the question. The question is "why won't 'pkg
> >> install sendmail' work for users that need it?" There are two
> >> technical reasons for why a component is in base and two emotional /
> >> political.
> >> 
> >> The two technical reasons are:
> >> 1) The system won't work without it (e.g. rc files, kill, rm, etc)
> > 
> > As a sub-point, we do want the base system to be a reliable and
> > consistent set of things such that scripts and instructions can
> > reference them; one of FreeBSD's strong points is that I can write a
> > script targeting "FreeBSD" and know that a reasonably complete system
> > is going to be present and that I won't find out that, say, ping or
> > telnet are not installed. This expands the set of important tools much
> > beyond "kill" and "rm" and means we should tread very, very carefully
> > in terms of moving things out of the base system -- this is one of my
> > major general reservations about the proposed implemention of pkgbase.
> > 
> > That said, sendmail is *definitely* not in that category so long as
> > some basic MTA is there that makes reports from periodic etc. work.
> > The important thing is that mail(1) work, not that it be sendmail. So
> > I'm 100% in favor of dropping sendmail.
> > -Nathan
> 
> I think the situation is similar to the one that was when bind replaced 
> with unbound/ldns. A fully featured authoritative DNS server was removed 
> from the base system and replaced with small and secure DNS resolver.

It is very different, bind had decided to recode in a new language
which would of required stuff not in base to build it, that made bind
very unattractive.  Also no one has made any proof what so ever that
DMA is more secure than sendmail, infact the opposite is actually
more likely simply due to useage exposure. 

> >> 2) The component is tightly coupled to the kernel (e.g. bhyve)
> >> 
> >> There are of course plenty of things which fall in to both buckets:
> >> libc, ifconfig, etc.
> >> 
> >> The two emotional reasons are:
> >> 1) Emotional attachment (e.g. fortune)
> >> 2) Inertia (rcs, sendmail, etc)
> >> Thanks to bapt and friends pkg "just works" for most people for most
> >> cases. In conclusion, further discussion needs to either a) make a
> >> compelling case for why either my technical points are insufficient or
> >> the emotional drivers are critical; or b) explain why "pkg install
> >> sendmail" won't work.
> >> 
> >> Cheers.
> >> -M
> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-arch at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> 

-- 
Rod Grimes                                                 rgrimes at freebsd.org