* On 09/05/06 08:23 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
| On Tue, 2006-05-09 at 01:40, Odhiambo WASHINGTON wrote:
| > * On 08/05/06 22:50 -0700, Fred Harris wrote:
| > | I understand that. It's not dovecot's fault really.
| > | I apologize for ranting here. I think Fedora has a few issues to work
| > | out with this. I think up until this point, there's been a conflict
| > | of interest with the Redhat network and Fedora. Redhat has almost an
| > | incentive to introduce problems into Fedora so that people will pay
| > | them to help them with them. Maybe it will get better now that Fedora
| > | is more on its own.
| >
| > (Free|Net|Open)BSD's also exist as very stable alternatives for you,
| > just FYI! You don't have to die with Fedora or Redhat.
|
| To make this relevant to the conversion, can you tell us what
| versions of Dovecot have been included and how they handled
| the transition from .99x to 1.x in those distros?
Officially, in the ports tree on FreeBSD is 1.0beta3. Has not
been updated by the port maintainer for a while. However,
I have built several systems and I am running 1.0beta7 in all
of them. No problems at all, except for the a dumb moment when
I compiled KQUEUE support, which is known to be broken.
What was the original problem the OP had again? ;)
-Wash
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
DISCLAIMER: See http://www.wananchi.com/bms/terms.php
--
+======================================================================+
|\ _,,,---,,_ | Odhiambo Washington