On 10 Nov 1998, Michael K. Johnson writes: > Please read the list archives; I answered this question yesterday > several hours before you asked. :-) Fair enough, I do sometimes read out of order, and you caught me :-) Worse, I think I just did it again before reading this one from you... oops! > They are valid, and the only promise I can make you about an update > to fix this is that if we release an updated linuxconf, it will not > be to fix this bug in a module which we do not support. While I now better understand the issue, it feels odd to leave out sendmail support from a system admin tool -- email is a pretty common application these days, and sendmail is the only RH 5.2 supplied MTA, unless you count the Taylor UUCP package :-) > The linuxconf core appears to be stable on 5.2. That was all we > could do; we had enough to do to make that be the case without > getting to the modules. As we are able to certify modules as > working, they will normally be installed by default. We already > do that for treemenu in Red Hat Linux 5.2. OK. I hear that loud and clear -- now. It was not clear to me from the RH 5.2 docs that I have read so far. Is there a way to make this approach more obvious than in email from you here on the list? More obvious to the average RH 5.2 user, I mean. The equation 'supported == installed by default', while valid and reasonable, is not a common support convention I'm used to, and I don't think the RH 5.2 docs mention it either. Does RH support every single Emacs .el or .elc file that is included in the RH 5.2 distribution? I think they are all installed by default if one installs Emacs <grin>? I'm not trying to be difficult, just hoping that the convention can be made clearer or more explicit somehow. Is there an official place to get a list of certified modules or parts of applications, for Linuxconf and for other complex packages in RH 5.2? Should there be? Also, it would be great if RH could make public their list of known problems with the 'unsupported' Linuxconf modules, so those here with the skills and time to do so can work on fixing them and pass patches back to Jacques. As far as I can tell, the mailconf module itself was fine in 1.12r5, if it had access to the supplied configuration files that go with it. dialout likewise. In other words, it apparently worked OK before it was repackaged by RH. Just an unfortunate mistake. The dnsconf module is another matter entirely, and still seems to behave a bit oddly at times for me even in 1.13r4. If RH has characterized that unwanted behaviour, access to that info would (hopefully!) help us improve it so it can be used (and RH certified/supported/documented) in RH 5.3 or RH 6.x or whatever. Jonathan -- Jonathan Marsden | Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Making electronic 1849 N. Wabash Ave.| Phone: +1 (909) 794 1151 | communications work Redlands, CA 92374 | FAX: +1 (909) 794 3016 | reliably for Christian USA | http://www.xc.org/jonathan | missions worldwide --- You are currently subscribed to linuxconf as: [[email protected]] To unsubscribe, forward this message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
