> Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:58:22 +0100 > From: Igor ??ivkovi?? <cont...@igor-zivkovic.from.hr> > To: BLFS Development List <blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org> > Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] discussion about sendmail > > On 2014-02-26 16:28, lf...@cruziero.com wrote: > >> Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:00:19 +0100 > >> From: Igor ??ivkovi?? <cont...@igor-zivkovic.from.hr> > >> To: BLFS Development List <blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org> > >> Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] discussion about sendmail > >> > >> On 2014-02-26 15:53, lf...@cruziero.com wrote: > >> > > >> > And as asked clearly: the references are ... , what, where? > >> > >> Go to your favorite search engine, type sendmail vs postfix vs exim, > >> and > >> enjoy the read. > >> > > > > > > Hang on: you indicated that you were basing your decision - and fairly > > explicit recommendation to others, and actions taken that affect others > > - in substantial part on a 'belief'. Is that belief based on reliable > > properly-done studies that you can give references for? Or are you just > > going by vague notions accrued from the internet? Or what? > > Would you care to find reliable and properly done studies which show > that sendmail is in any way superior to either postfix or exim? Besides
Yes, as I suspected: you're bs'ing. You made the claim and you cannot or will not back it up. Period. And to try to hide that, you try the old transparent attempted tactic to put the onus on the other. You made the claim: where's the evidence; do you stand by it, or revert it, or water it down, or what? > wasting our time on useless discussion, you can't even be bothered to > send a patch to fix current instructions which nobody verified to > actually work for past couple of BLFS releases. Get real. > Why would anyone put their work - at least directly - under the auspices of attitudes as exhibited. And spare us the attempted 'pulling rank' re book contribs: 'doing things' != 'doing good work' . > > > Is the central criterion here, just what _you_ personally can be > > bothered > > with? > > I bothered enough with it to remove it from the book. If someone else > cares to fix it, it will probably be back in the book. I personally > don't see the value in having it in the book but I'm not the only editor > and/or BLFS user. It's that simple. Where is the problem, exactly? > > > >> > Any other packages - e.g. TeXLive, LibreOffice, ... - you'd classify > >> > similarly? > >> > >> I'd dump texlive, but libreoffice is useful to me. > > > > Just to check: if something is deemed by you to be presently not useful > > to you, then do you 'dump' it from just your own builds, or would you > > want > > to remove it from the central blfs-book altogether, for everyone else? > > Which part of *I'd dump xxx* you didn't understand? > And again, you try to point folks away from simple clarificatory questions that may be awkward to you. Sounds like maybe you'd rip out everything from the central blfs book that you personally can't be bothered with. rgds, akhiezer > -- > Igor ??ivkovi?? > http://www.slashtime.net/ > -- > -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
