Pike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>That was my original complaint ... the qmail rpm swoops itself all
>over your fs symlinking every possible place where someone would
>possibly look for it.
Then your complaint is with whoever built the rpm you installed. Only
one set of links is necessary, and they are all in one directory:
/var/qmail.
>In fact, it does what you suggest.
Which is it? Symlinks in "every possible place" or only in /var/qmail?
>Afterwards, it doesn't tell you what it's done.
That's why I prefer to install qmail from the directions in
INSTALL. Sure, the rpm's make it easier to *install*, but, IMHO, they
make it harder to *maintain* since you don't know exactly what they
did.
>Very ugly, very messy.
I don't think it has to be, but beauty is in the eye of the
beholder. If you find symlinks ugly, you won't be happy with a
pseudo-fsstnd qmail.
>I'm still hoping on a 'linux specific' (fsstnd compliant) qmail
>version.
Sorry, it's not gonna happen.
> \200================\200\200---------------\200
> \200========\200======\200\200------\200---------\200
> \200========\200=====\200\200-------\200---------\200
>etc.
Nice .signature.
-Dave
