Re: rebuild world with NO_SENDMAIL=YES

From: Matthew X. Economou (xenophon+usenet_at_irtnog.org)
Date: 10/28/05


Date: 28 Oct 2005 14:44:04 -0400


>>>>> "Keve" == Keve Nagy <see_my_sig@address.invalid> writes:

    Keve> My idea is to do a buildworld having "NO_SENDMAIL=YES" in
    Keve> /etc/make.conf. Then remove the files left over from
    Keve> sendmail, and build postfix from the ports.

Why bother? It seems like an awful lot of work to recover maybe a few
megabytes of disk space (if that is all you are after). I ask out of
genuine curiosity. In my world, such effort can't be justified,
especially when replacing Sendmail with Postfix is as simple as
editing three files.

    Keve> My question is: how risky is a buildworld for my existing
    Keve> ports/packages and apps?

It depends. Anything that is statically linked will break if the
kernel system call interface changes. Anything that dynamically
linked to libraries in the base system will break if any type
signatures change. The package database itself will not be affected.
Practically speaking, I've had no problems, but the potential is there
for serious breakage.

Best wishes,
Matthew

-- 
jsoffron: I'm generally pretty high on national defense...
Mr. Bad Example: Careful...it's a gateway policy. Before you know it,
 you'll be mainlining the hard stuff like trade agreements.
jsoffron: Too late...I've been freebasing Nafta all day... Sweet,
 sweet NAFTA.
    - As seen on Slashdot