Re: mailwrapper

> i am working on a patch for mailwrapper, which i'd like to move from
> FreeBSD-utilities to its own package.

Two thumbs up for that!  Might work better in base if
"OPTIONS_UNSET+=MAILWRAPPER" did what it was supposed to but it doesn't
seem like that will ever happen.

Please don't, however, link anything to sendmail.  Even it's author says
sendmail should be deprecated.  Despite the many hours some of us have
put into sendmail.cf customizations this software is long past its
effective deprecation date.

Roger Marquis


> however i'm a little stymied by usr.sbin/mailwrapper/Makefile[0], which
> seems to do a few fairly odd things for the benefit of src users, such as
> linking mailwrapper to either dma or sendmail if mailwrapper itself isn't
> built.
> 
> i'd like to significantly simplify the logic here so that if mailwrapper is
> enabled (${MK_MAILWRAPPER} == yes), it's always installed in the usual
> place, and doesn't pretend to be dma or sendmail, and there is no special
> handling depending on the value of ${MK_SENDMAIL} and ${MK_DMAGENT}.
> 
> this might require some changes to either sendmail or dma (which of course
> i'd test before submitting anything), but in principle, does this sound
> like a reasonable idea?
> 
> i am concious that many/most people don't use pkgbase yet and we shouldn't
> break things for them, but this seems like an ideal to time to clean up
> some of this legacy stuff.
> 
> [0] https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/tree/usr.sbin/mailwrapper/Makefile
>