Instructions for FreeBSD

DAve dave.list at
Mon Jun 5 20:37:47 IST 2006

Mike Jakubik wrote:
> DAve wrote:


>> This would be a religious discussion I think.
> Of course everyone uses what works for them, however you're presenting a 
> specific situation in which you need to install conflicting software, 
> this would create a problem for any packaging system. Although some 
> ports support different versions of the same application, such as 
> apache. However i don't see how that problem applies to MS.

Your question, your answer ;^)

Mike Jakubik wrote:
 > Also forgot to mention, if you put the files according to hier (
 > ), you may cause a problem
 > by conflicting with the port based counterparts. Therefore you should
 > put the files in their own dirs. But again, i think the best solution is
 > to patch the port accordingly.

If the port currently works, and Julian's tarball currently works, what 
is there to patch?

Now if there needs to be an alternative to the FreeBSD port for those 
who dislike dealing with tarballs, that only requires an installer 
script that doesn't stomp on a prior installed port. Jan, as the 
maintainer of the port, would be the man to consult.

None of this requires the port to be patched. It only requires a FreeBSD 
specific install, whether that be instructions on the Wiki or a shell 
script. But as I told Julian earlier, there is nothing wrong with the 
package. Admins who dislike looking at source can use the port, others 
have the source available.

Just my thoughts.


Three years now I've asked Google why they don't have a
logo change for Memorial Day. Why do they choose to do logos
for other non-international holidays, but nothing for

Maybe they forgot who made that choice possible.

More information about the MailScanner mailing list