eculp at bafirst.com
eculp at bafirst.com
Thu Jun 23 14:53:14 GMT 2005
Quoting dick hoogendijk <dick at nagual.st>:
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 14:53:21 +0200
> Milan Obuch <milan at netlabplus.sk> wrote:
>> On Thursday 23 June 2005 14:26, dick hoogendijk wrote:
>> > Hello
>> > Can someone please tell me when it will be possible again to install
>> > courier to replace sendmail?
>> > What will happen if I change the makefile in mail/courier and remove
>> > the BROKEN statement. Will it compile and install then? What file
>> > permissions exactly will be changed?
>> > And why does it take _so_ long to have courier back. Will it ever be
>> > back?
>> Yes, it took long already. I was upset too and prepared my
>> personal/unofficial 0.50.0 port. It need some more polishing, but it
>> works reasonably well for me and (hopefully) for others too. Please
>> try it. You can find it at http://porst.dino.sk. I will try to find
>> some more time to get this PR'ed and hopefully commited, your
>> feedback in this issue is really welcome. Regards,
> OK, not quite the answer to my question. I really would like an official
> port, but hey, it's no production server, so I guess..
> I take it you unpack in /usr/ports/mail and then do a "portinstall
> mail/courier-0.50.0" ?
> Install authlib first (I know ;-)
> Are the other options like the old port? And what is "reasonably well"
I am runing the first 0.50 port and it actually worked better than the
one in ports that actually would overwrite a couple of my configuration
files, it has been a long time and I don't remember which but not
really difficult to find.
I then started compiling my own versions up to 0.49 and for 0.50 milan
offered the first version of this port which I understand is now
polished a bit more. I used it for upgrading 6 boxes that have been
running it ever since 0.50 came out with NO issues with the port. It
worked out of the box for both new and upgrades from the ports version
perfectly and is runing prefectly, of course as always, YMMV. I am
using ldap authorization, fyi.
> And why is this very good mailer NOT supported on FreeBSD?
More information about the freebsd-ports