Re: [Nmh-workers] Thoughts on 1.5 release candidates

[Paul Fox]

i wrote:
 > ken wrote:
 >  > Greetings all,
 >  > 
 >  > I think this time around we've gotten some more traction on this release;
 >  > we've even got people upgrading from 1.0 (!) and on what sounds to be
 >  > rather ancient hardware.  As always, it turns out Paul Vixie was right ...
 >  > a longer release cycle this time is definitely a good thing.
 >  > 
 >  > So, I'm wondering ... what do people think so far of 1.5-RC2?  Have you
 >  > tried it?  If so, are you happy with it?  If you haven't ... how come?
 >  > No judgement here, I'm trying to figure out what would make it easier
 >  > for you to try it out.
 >  > 
 >  > Any other comments, good or bad, are welcome.
 > 
 > so far so good.
 > 
 > one nit:  when configured with sendmail rather than smtp (i used
 > the docs/contrib/build_nmh script to do this, so i can't quote what
 > that did under the covers), the "make check" step fails.  all of
 > (well, most of ) the test-post-* scripts fail because they set up
 > a local fakesmtp program using -server 127.0.0.1 and -port BIGNUM,
 > and presumably send fails to connect to it due to the config.

heh.  of course, send didn't actually fail, since my local sendmail
program was working just fine.  this morning i noticed that the
outbound mailq on my colo server is full of mail to
address@hidden  :-)

paul
=---------------------
 paul fox, address@hidden (arlington, ma, where it's 48.4 degrees)