On Sun, 2013-06-23 at 22:40 -0400, Jeff Licquia wrote: > Sort of. Strictly speaking, a "mail transport agent" is an agent which > transports mail. So as long as mail coming into the system gets > transported, whether the MTA is a full-featured system like Sendmail or > something a lot simpler. > > At least, that's the Debian perspective (and one which I agree with).
Yep, sounds reasonable to me. > > 1) Install the entire MTA, but leave the server component unconfigured > > (assuming this is even possible). Enabling the server component later > > could be done using dpkg-reconfigure. > > This is possible. The exim4-daemon-light package, for example, takes > heroic steps to do the right thing in as many situations as possible > without any end-user configuration, which is why it's the default. But is it heroic enough to be able to determine whether the user wants a full MTA, or just /usr/sbin/sendmail to satisfy LSB requirements? How could it differentiate these two cases? Assume for a moment that we nuke lsb-invalid-mta, and make exim4-daemon-light a dependency of lsb-core. Is it smart enough to figure out that it doesn't need to configure the daemon based on the fact that it was installed as a dependency of lsb-core? I guess we still want the following to happen: - If either exim4 or exim4-daemon-light are installed explicitly, then we want the daemon to be configured - If exim4 or exim4-daemon-light are installed explicitly *after* lsb-core, we want to dpkg-reconfigure exim4-daemon-light Or perhaps it would be better to have a separate meta-package which doesn't configure the daemon? AFAICT installing exim4-daemon-heavy either before or after lsb-core in this scenario should take care of itself. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1372064462.15639.18.camel@wotan
