Bug#714634: [lsb-discuss] Clarification of general LSB requirements
Aaron Sowry <[email protected]> Thu, 11 Jul 2013 09:53:52 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.debian.devel.lsb |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <1373529232.669.18.camel__8485.75439672477$1373529443$gmane$org@wotan> |
On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 17:25 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > If lsb-core is going to pull in default-mta as the preferred option, then > arguably lsb-invalid-mta shouldn't exist at all I agree. None of the suggested solutions address the crontab issue, and there may be other similar problems we haven't found yet. I realise that Ubuntu perceives this as a problem, and it seems to stem from the fact that Debian's default sendmail client implementation (exim4) is intimately tied to the server component. But Debian != Ubuntu, and I agree with Debian's definition that an MTA should consist of both server and client components. That said, there is no reason why a simple sendmail client cannot be provided separately by those distributions which don't want to have to install a server - is this a completely unreasonable course of action for Canonical to take? IMHO, as far as Debian is concerned, lsb-invalid-mta has to go.