Re: DragonFly mail agent (round two)

[Jeremy Messenger <mezz7@xxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 16:57:57 +0100, Matthias Schmidt wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> * Michael Neumann wrote:
>> 
>> Wow!
>> 
>> I haven't heard of dma, but I like the idea. I don't need sendmail on
>> boxes other than the mail server. For all other boxes a local delivery
>> is enough.
> 
> That's the reason why corecode@ and me wrote dma :)
> 
>> Does that mean we get rid of sendmail someday? I mean, it can always be
>> installed from pkgsrc.
> 
> This is the long term goal.  If dma(8) is considered stable enough we
> hook it up to the build as a sendmail replacement.
> 
>> Next replace named/bind by a caching-only proxy. I don't see a reason
>> to include a DNS server, but for example no web-server.
> 
> I'm not sure about that one.  You can't compare BIND with sendmail in
> terms of users.  Most people don't need a caching-proxy and they're fine
> without BIND.  But the admins who use it (like me) are very happy that a
> full nameserver is included in the base.

Kind of same argue for anyone that want to have MTA (sendmail) in base 
system. If you tell me to use pkgsrc, then why not use BIND in pkgsrc? I 
can keep going on. :-) Honestly, I always want FreeBSD to get rid of 
sendmail, BIND and others to get us to use ports/packages instead.

Cheers,
Mezz

>> Other examples are ntpd.
> 
> http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/mailarchive/commits/2008-02/msg00002.html
> :P
> 
> Regards
> 
> 	Matthias