Re: Bug#23000: Bug Terrorism

1998-06-18 Thread Igor Grobman
Some time around Wed, 17 Jun 1998 11:21:08 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: Scott Ellis wrote: No, you're not hiding this on the bug tracking system any more. Neither are you. The reason that sendmail broke is that you made a DELIBERATE modification to procmail that sendmail

Re: Bug Terrorism

1998-06-17 Thread Herbert Xu
Scott Ellis wrote: No, you're not hiding this on the bug tracking system any more. Neither are you. The reason that sendmail broke is that you made a DELIBERATE modification to procmail that sendmail wasn't expecting. While I agree that sendmail That's just simply true. If you have a short

Re: Bug Terrorism

1998-06-17 Thread Herbert Xu
Brian White wrote: severity 23000 normal -- The reason that sendmail broke is that you made a DELIBERATE modification to procmail that sendmail wasn't expecting. While I agree that sendmail should probably be more graceful about handling it, it is not a release-critical error. A vast

Bug Terrorism

1998-06-16 Thread Scott Ellis
No, you're not hiding this on the bug tracking system any more. The reason that sendmail broke is that you made a DELIBERATE modification to procmail that sendmail wasn't expecting. While I agree that sendmail should probably be more graceful about handling it, it is not a release-critical

Re: Bug Terrorism

1998-06-16 Thread Jens Ritter
Scott Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No, you're not hiding this on the bug tracking system any more. Come on, cool down! That´s a bad way to get this resolved. Please DON´T do that again. I think -private would have been more apropriate. I know everybody is getting nervous in this deep

Re: Bug Terrorism

1998-06-16 Thread Brian White
severity 23000 normal -- The reason that sendmail broke is that you made a DELIBERATE modification to procmail that sendmail wasn't expecting. While I agree that sendmail should probably be more graceful about handling it, it is not a release-critical error. A vast majority of people (like