Welcome to the LFS club :)
When I said that the sendmail people made the docs as hard to
follow as possible (the docs are quite contradictory at times) I was
trying to make constructive criticism. I believe this is done on
purpose, so they can make money selling support. Can you think of any
other reason why sendmail should be any more difficult to compile and
install than any other program ?
I gave up on X a year ago, I just could not compile it, even
though I had all the necessary compilers and libraries, and followed
the instructions to the letter.
As for security, yes, I believe the main reason governments
and individuals seriously try to use linux is because of windows
infamous "back doors". As soon as a hacker discovers one, they publish
a patch which opens another somewhere else , with a different
password/encryption scheme. There is no reason on earth why
programmers would include code in internet explorer which allows
someone to remotely manipulate files etc on your hard-disk. It is
quite obviously put there for a purpose. Red Hat and others have the
same potential security hazards.
As an aside, I managed to install sendmail 8.9.3 once, but got
hacked because of it. I was having trouble configuring it, and was not
sure if it was a problem with my firewall, so I lowered my firewall
and sure enough , someone left some notes in my /root directory. Bad
docs in sendmail make it a terrible security risk.
The LFS docs are really very good, and I think that Gerard
Beekmans makes an almost inhuman effort to keep up to date. I am very
thankful to him for teaching me most of what I know about linux.
It is a pity though that he did not include mail in his basic
system, as today that is an absolutely essential part of any OS. His
docs in BLFS are very superficial, and do not work for me at all.
Enough.... let me get back to my (working) windows system. Oh
shit, its slow again. I wish Bill would read through my personal docs
a little bit faster .... :(
>> >> Like I said , I have trashed my system xxx times, I have done
>> >> everything the docs recommend, I have been trying hundreds of
>> >> different combinations. I am not capable of installing them.
>> >I agree with that last sentence.
>> >> If I could , I would write the HOWTO. But I cant, and there
>> >> are NO HOWTOS AT ALL on the net on this subject. So the tens of
>> >> thousands that successfully installed from source must all be bl&^%dy
>> >> lazy.
>> >> I don't believe you know what you are talking about. I DO NOT
>> >> mean using RPMs, I mean installing from source.
>> >Yes. I mean compiling from source too.
>> Like I said. I want a howto that teaches you how to install
>> the blo&^%dy thing..... If you managed to install, why don't you just
>> tell us how you did it ?
>30 months ??? That makes ME feel better. I've been working on setting up my
>system from scratch since January of this year with a self-imposed deadline of 31
>Dec 02. (I think that deadline will be extended. I've put too much time into this
>to just drop it.)
>I followed Linux From Scratch (LFS) as far as it was documented. One thing that I
>think that we are having is that LFS, and no one else that I know of either, has
>bothered to explain just WHO users/groups : bin,daemon,adm,lp,sync,shutdown, etc.
>are, WHY they are needed if they are, and WHAT files to associate to those users.
>At least I *think* that's causing problems.
>Yes. The documentation sucks.
>I got fetchmail and Pine to work but Sendmail flat out refuses to work.
>I sent Sendmail a gripe about their docs and this is what I got:
>Partial quote from an email that I received from sendmail.org :
>"
>Unfortunately, the question of what should be in the documents is
>not an easy one to settle. Some of the people installing sendmail
>have done it often enough that they can almost do it with their
>hands tied behind their backs. If we overdo the documentation,
>they won't read it at all. They are looking for quick pointers to
>anything they have to do differently this time. Others have never
>installed sendmail before, but are experienced system administrators
>and have installed other software. And so it goes, until we get to
>the near novice. It is very hard to find a documentation style
>that works for all people.
>"
>Sendmail refuses to budge on rewriting their docs. If Sendmail's docs are causing
>you problems, send them a gripe also !
>My 'opinion' is : They just don't know how to write good docs or will take the
>time to write them.
>Volunteers and 'goodness of their hearts' be d*mned. They wrote the program. They
>should document it.
>Once my system is 100% functional. I'm going to erase it and start all over
>again. This time documenting what I do. I've learned too late that I need a log
>book to remember what I did last week that might be causing problems now. Handy
>for notes also.
>I gave up on Sendmail for awhile. I'm working on getting X working. X can't find
>my screen. Well I can. It's right in front of me ! Needs cleaning. :)
>P.S.
>Once you get your system working, don't forget to write a HOWTO. *IF* you can
>remember what you did.
>'Windows sucks' huh ? Well, it installed in less than an hour and works fine. Mr.
>Gates might be reading my HDD though without my knowledge. I might have Linux's
>source code but it would take me a lifetime to study it.
>Good Luck !
by