Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:49:28 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: owl-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: OWL 22.214.171.1248 and postfix distro. > >On 05-Aug-2013 14:47:44 +0400, misha shiposh wrote: > >> Good day guys, but i am tormented by one question, why in > >> Owl-current 2013/04/08 for 32-bit x86 we have old postfix distro ? The unfortunate truth is that it's because we haven't been putting enough time into Owl development and maintenance lately. > >> What's the difference between postfix-2.4.15-owl1 and > >> postfix-2.4.15-owl2 ? * Sun Feb 12 2012 Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon-at-owl.openwall.com> 1:2.4.15-owl2 - Fixed build failure on Linux 3.x. So no difference for you, unless you do this kind of experimental rebuilds. On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 05:01:56PM +0400, Mikhail Shiposh wrote: > Can you tell me, maybe your postfix team can take a look at new version > and make it little more secure too? We definitely should update many packages, including Postfix. > And i hope that ldap/mysql modules will be there on next release? This is unlikely. > I use owl as mail relay at least on 4 server and 3 organizations. And > Updating owl with all packages makes difficult, because i must rebuild > every time postfix. If you do high(er) risk things such as maintaining a mail users database in LDAP, then maybe it'd make more sense for you to use Owl as an OpenVZ host system for e.g. CentOS containers? You don't have to expose any other services (not even SSH) on such containers to the Internet. Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.