On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 12:27:32AM -0800, Matthew Dempsky wrote:I strongly recommend against this. There's no need for it, and anyone who insists on running qmail (a course of action that I strongly recommend against) should be capable of building/installing it as they wish. Moreover, it's not clear to me (probably because I'm not a copyright/patent/trademark/etc. attorney) that the recent qmail licensing announcement actually has the legal meaning that is being assigned to it. ---Rsk
| david | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| Brice Goglin | Re: Linux 2.6.21-rc2 |
| Christian Volkmann | 2.6.23-rc6: usb 1-1: device not accepting address 2, error -62 |
git: | |
| Jon Smirl | Re: VCS comparison table |
| Nicolas Pitre | Re: git to libgit2 code relicensing |
| Giuseppe Bilotta | [PATCHv3 0/4] gitweb: remote heads feature |
| Mark Burton | Git commit won't add an untracked file given on the command line |
| Nick Guenther | Re: Real men don't attack straw men |
| Tanvir | Re: Adobe Flash on OpenBSD |
| Marius ROMAN | 1440x900 resolution problem |
| Gilles Chehade | Re: wpi (4) and 4.4 |
| Johann Baudy | Re: [PATCH] Packet socket: mmapped IO: PACKET_TX_RING |
| Volker Armin Hemmann | build error with 2.6.27.6+reiser4+ehci-hub patch. ERROR: "mii_ethtool_gset" [drive... |
| Patrick Ohly | [RFC PATCH 00/13] hardware time stamping + igb example implementation |
| Laszlo Attila Toth | [PATCHv7 3/5] Interface group: core (netlink) part |
