Removing Sendmail

[Jens Rehsack]

Terry Lambert wrote:
> Jens Rehsack wrote:
> 
>>John Baldwin wrote:
>>
>>>First, core@ is not the appropriate body for that type of request.
>>>Both current@ and arch@ are much better targets.  Second, is
>>>NO_SENDMAIL + the postfix port inadequate?
>>
>>The problem I see with that is, that even a minimalistic base install
>>installs things like sendmail, ppp, atm-stuff, g77 and so on.
>>
>>I really think splitting the base in some sub-parts would it make much
>>easier to do NO_SENDMAIL on my own. So I had to remove each not required
>>file separately. That's no good solution.
> 
> 
> 
> So we are back to:
> 
> o	breaking the base system into packages,

As it's already done with crypto, krb5, src, ...

> o	either pre-installed with package alternatives to
> 	allow deinstall and reinstall, OR

No, not deinstall. Decide on first binary sysinstall, maybe with writing 
a template /etc/make.conf respecting the packages you didn't want.

> o	we are into seperately packaging all mail servers,
> 	picking the current one as default, and hacking the
> 	heck out of sysinstall to make sure there's a seperate
> 	choice item to get one installed

No, if someone decides not having eg. an mta (s)he should know about the 
risk and consequences.

> ...all so that programs that require the ability to send local
> mail, many of them base systems components, can function.

Only if the wrapper is configured correct (eg. for mail) or not, eg. if 
ppp or g77 is required but not available.

> That's what I said in the first place.
> 
> So we are agreed.

I meant other. Maybe now it's more clear.

> The correct mailing lists for this discussion are config at freebsd.org
> and install at freebsd.org.
> 
> I've set followups to config at freebsd.org to indicate my own
> bias and the total lack of space for more sysinstall code on the
> install floppy...

Just 2 more lists to subscribe :-) - may local folder list get slowly 
huge :-)

Regards,
Jens