On 02/25/2014 12:39 PM, akhiezer wrote: >> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 11:26:19 +0100 >> From: Pierre Labastie <pierre.labas...@neuf.fr> >> To: BLFS Development List <blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org> >> Subject: [blfs-dev] discussion about sendmail >> >> Hi, >> >> Recently, sendmail has been archived, (see ticket #4723). There has not >> been a real discussion about that. The reason is that the current >> building instructions do not lead to a functional package, although >> Armin and Igor have tried to do so. Furthermore, there are alternatives >> (exim4 and postfix), which are deemed better than sendmail anyway. OTOH, >> I suppose that folks monitoring this list not all follow BLFS trac, and >> it may be interesting to hear what they have to say. That is the purpose >> of this thread. >> > > > Yes, I was about to post here on that. > > > Wouldn't normally such a discussion take place on -dev and only after that > would any -book actions happen - per the notes: > ---- > Ref: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/mail.html > -- > "blfs-book > The blfs-book list is used for coordinating the BLFS Book's > maintenance. Traffic on it is mostly Trac and SVN commit messages. It > is important that all development discussion of interest to the Book's > users take place on blfs-dev, not here." > ---- > > > The trac item is: > > http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/4723 > > That's a _very_ summary-'removal' of sendmail; and doesn't reflect well > on b/lfs. > > > "Since its build system requires IQ over 9000 to understand, I won't > bother to try to fix it." (ibid). There are plenty of distros that build > and use sendmail perfectly well. Very often b/lfs will avail itself of > such instructions from other distros, for all sorts of packages, and to > a very wide range of degrees of complexity. Yet in this case the package > is dropped like a hot potato(/coal). >
I've advised that it either should be fixed or dropped if nobody cares about it. Current configuration (build went fine, maybe I missed that - but the build system is still like nothing I've seen before) options do not work, as it is pasted in the ticket. The package was lfs74_built; so it was just indeed build tested only for previous release(s) and from the look of that, seems that its instructions went a bit obsolete. > > What was (really) going on there, in that trac ticket? > > > Also, the tone of "The current situation is terrible and is not copy/paste > friendly at all. See Xorg, Qt, KDE instructions for more information." (re > libreoffice: ref 'http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/4725'), > together with the above sendmail stuff, sounds more like someone is in a > rather irascible mood? > If you look at libreoffice page, you can notice that it uses <PREFIX> in its instructions. That's insanely hard to script (you need to use sed and all that stuff when you copy/paste it), you can't simply copy paste it to the console (need to change <PREFIX> to the desired prefix). My advice was that it either uses hardcoded prefix like /usr or /opt/libreoffice or that it uses environment variables for prefix like in Xorg, KDE, Qt instructions. I apologize if I meant something bad by that, it was never my intention but to make instructions work good and work for everyone. -- Note: My last name is not Krejzi. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
