Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ssmtp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188400 ------- Additional Comments From wolfy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-10-30 11:31 EST ------- That is my point EXACTLY. But since my experience is very limited, I'd better ask twice than bumping my head :) Here is a short analysis of the up-to-date patches from debian unstable (the way I see them; please bear with me if I am wrong and point me in the right direction): - patch number 7 modifies some debian email addresses and activates IPv6 by default; we do not really care about the first issue, second modification was included in my spec file released on 2006-10-09; - patch number 8 raises the ssl issue I would like clarifications for; - patch number 9 a) activates cram-md5; this was already included in my spec released 2006-04-09 b) fixes a portability issue introduced by the usage of a glibc extension. Since the bug seems to occur on platforms non-supported by FE, I contemplate the idea of including this patch but with a conditional (something like rpmbuild --define "non-glibc 1" and a default value of 0 for this variable). However, I assume this should not be a blocker for a FE package. - all patches (7 to 10) add / correct some debconf translations. Given the above, could you please let me know what modifications are still needed,in order to get in shape for inclusion in FE ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review