From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1G4OQm-0001bs-Kv for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:50:37 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k6MKmlI1002514; Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:48:47 GMT Received: from rutherford.zen.co.uk (rutherford.zen.co.uk [212.23.3.142]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6MKgCLp014122 for ; Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:42:12 GMT Received: from [82.69.83.178] (helo=desiato.digimed.co.uk) by rutherford.zen.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1G4OIe-0001ZK-6w for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:42:12 +0000 Received: from krikkit.digimed.co.uk (krikkit.digimed.co.uk [192.168.1.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by desiato.digimed.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id D00BD14003CB for ; Sat, 22 Jul 2006 21:43:02 +0100 (BST) Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 21:42:55 +0100 From: Neil Bothwick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error Message-ID: <20060722214255.065606d3@krikkit.digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <44C26BCA.1020008@mid.email-server.info> References: <49bf44f10607220921r614c9650v33f73c25ebb59d3c@mail.gmail.com> <44C25502.5020804@mid.email-server.info> <49bf44f10607221007r522789q6921abeb7ca3f7d0@mail.gmail.com> <44C26BCA.1020008@mid.email-server.info> Organization: Digital Media Production X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.4.0-rc4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu) X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7260 0F33 97EC 2F1E 7667 FE37 BA6E 1A97 4375 1903 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=Sig_wG.gFJKh.Mxj12ysbhUPjc1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Originating-Rutherford-IP: [82.69.83.178] X-Archives-Salt: 4b0a85ef-d2eb-4e2d-a58e-31037afbd6b3 X-Archives-Hash: 0f38b5743edd7689634915a73642829c --Sig_wG.gFJKh.Mxj12ysbhUPjc1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:17:46 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote: > I don't know, but it would be a very useful addition - and IMO, > they could dump that useless feature, that portage can do SMTP > by itself. That's so un-Unix, so Windows-like :( Portage doesn't do SMTP by itself, it uses the Python smtplib module. Re-using existing software is very unix like > Yes, it would, but I'd actually not suggest to do so. Installing > postfix (or any SMTP server, for that matter) just for Portage > isn't the right way to go. It's too much code, opening too many > potential problems, which can be sidestepped by making > portage use /usr/sbin/sendmail instead. Why not let portage work with the same SMTP server you use for all other mail? If your mail client can send mail, why not tell portage to use the same route. There's absolutely no need to use a local MTA if you don't already have one. --=20 Neil Bothwick User-friendly: (adj.) trivialized, slow, incapable, and boring. --Sig_wG.gFJKh.Mxj12ysbhUPjc1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEwo3Tum4al0N1GQMRAiqhAJ9xJxoHdnTew+27pJjbCfqfo6XVSACgzyWp 0TCbMtzkJNwDMvjNttSYDPc= =Rckf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_wG.gFJKh.Mxj12ysbhUPjc1-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list