Re: BIND in the base (Was: Re: tmux(1) in base)

From: Gregory Shapiro <gshapiro_at_gshapiro.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:49:15 -0700

> If sendmail is replaced by dma, will it receive the same level of
> care?  I guess this is considered to be a dubious concern by some.

It is a valid concern, but not one I can comment on (i.e., I would not
be able to maintain it).

Received on Tue Sep 22 2009 - 22:49:20 UTC

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Emil Mikulic: "Re: BIND in the base (Was: Re: tmux(1) in base)"
Previous message: Daniel O'Connor: "Re: where is device_get_parent function defined"
In reply to: Steve Kargl: "Re: BIND in the base (Was: Re: tmux(1) in base)"
Next in thread: Steve Kargl: "Re: BIND in the base (Was: Re: tmux(1) in base)"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:55 UTC