Update on the MailScanner in Fedora packaging situation

Eli Wapniarski eli at orbsky.homelinux.org
Mon May 25 04:56:16 UTC 2009

So.... I guess the first step would be to get the missing perl modules packaged. I would suggest waiting until F-9 is officially dead. So we don't leave F-9 users stuck in security patch limbo.


On Friday 22 May 2009 22:39:01 David Nalley wrote:
> 13 packages definitely need to be packaged. Mostly perl modules
> 23 packages already exist. For the most part these are on par or later
> versions than mailscanner includes. 2 perl modules look a bit out of
> date and we might file bugs requesting an update with the current
> maintainers.
> 4 packages have some very close name matches - so we'll need to check
> on the status of those in the source and see if they are really
> already existent or also need to be built.
> Details here:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MailScanner_in_Fedora#List_of_MailScanner_RPMs_Required_and_their_Status_Within_Fedora_-_.28Date_last_edited_-_22.2F05.2F09.29
> Anyone want to start staking claims?? We can trade reviews amongst
> ourselves and hopefully whittle this list down quickly.
> _______________________________________________
> mailscanner-sig mailing list
> mailscanner-sig at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner-sig

This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

More information about the mailscanner-sig mailing list