I should not expect better from courier, I've seen their annoying, arrogant error messages before.. but this one takes the cake..
configure: WARNING: === I think you are trying to run this configure script
configure: WARNING: === on Red Hat/Fedora. You're doing too much work!
configure: WARNING: === It's much faster to create installable binary RPMs
configure: WARNING: === like this: http://www.courier-mta.org/FAQ.html#rpm
configure: WARNING: === When you do this you may find that RPM will tell you
configure: WARNING: === to install some other software first, before trying to
configure: WARNING: === build this one, and even tell you the name of RPMs you
configure: WARNING: === need to install from the distribution CD. That's much
configure: WARNING: === easier than trying to figure out the same from some
configure: WARNING: === cryptic error message.
configure: WARNING:
configure: WARNING: === Even if you don't intend to use everything you need to
configure: WARNING: === have in order to build via RPM, you should still do as
configure: WARNING: === you're told. All the extra stuff (LDAP, SQL, etc...)
configure: WARNING: === goes into RPM sub-packages, which do not need to be
configure: WARNING: === installed.
configure: WARNING: === But, if you insist, you can simply add '--with-redhat'
configure: WARNING: === parameter to this configure script and not see this
configure: WARNING: === error message. You should also do this when upgrading
configure: WARNING: === and you didn't use RPM with the older version.
configure: error: ... in either case you better know what you're doing!
Yes, I know what I'm doing.. no, I don't want to have to use a stupid option to avoid a dumbass message and it's not RedHat/Fedora!!!
I hate arrogant programers but what I hate more is arrogant programers who can't program the checks properly in their annoying scripts. Did I mention I detest rpm?
For future reference.. `cat /etc/redhat-release` spare the dumbass errors, detect the OS correctly.
So they go through the trouble of checking for RedHat and throwing you out.. but don't bother with providing an option to specify where openssl lives.. just crap out during make.. (yes, I know, hack makefile). No wonder they need this RedHat check.. Why make configure scripts more usable when you simply tell the less-immersed users to go away?
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.unix-girl.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1051
You're clearly stupid and don't know how to operate your own system. Not only should the software not work, but you should be insulted by that software. Who in the hell are *you* to decide how to use a computer?
For shame, Kasia, I always thought you were a smart gal.
Doofus.
#Steve, a friend and I can't agree on whether your comment is ironic or not. Can you help us settle this?
#He was being sarcastic.. either that or suicidal.. but since I know Steve pretty well I'd put my money on sarcastic.
#I was thinking maybe sarcastic as well. Unless that happens to not be him.
#Kasia and I have long bemoaned the arrogance of the the Courier developer, and we were doing so via IM last night. This was sarcasm.
#Madam,
I stumbled upon your blog while trying to track down someone/thing that is possessing my computer. I use (alas) the inferior Windows system rather than UNIX because I'm an English teacher who, while not entirely clueless, is overburdened already and doesn't know how to make UNIX do everything I need.
I was wondering if you might have some advice on where to look for how to block this nefarious evildoer from my computer.
I combed through my recently changed files, and found some 27000+ invisible unnamed files, all with a obfuscated URL type code within them. The code translates to http://64.237.63.205/ or http://64.237.63.255/.
Unfortunately, I've now reached the end of my know-how, so I slipped online to see if anyone else had had trouble. Apparently you had. Have you any advice for a forlorn not-technical-enough-durnit person on how to block/kill/shred/or otherwise inconvience this rat?
Thank you for your time in reading my message, I hope you can and choose to help.
Yours,
Diana
(Sorry Kasia) Diana, this would be a great time to plug DSLReports' security forum, where you can go and ask questions about most any security related topic that you might have in mind.. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/security,1
As for those files.. I would backup any data that you might have thats important and clean (no executeables, etc) and just format your entire disk and reinstall your entire operating system if you suspect that something has happened to your computer. There is only so much you can do against malware with the current tools out there.
Anyway..Courier has always been an (expelitive deleted by me) when it comes to working. I don't know..for me..as long as it compiles, runs, and works..I could give less of hoot what the developer has shoved up his/her/it (expelitive deleted by me again).
Steve- Somebody I know could write something better than courier, and leave out the smart remarks you know. :)
As for me, I think this 3 day, 72-hour coding marathon is about to boil over..
#I know your pain. If you haven't already, you should check out Binc (Binc is not Courier) Imap.
#postfix for life!
yah, postfix rocks, swings and cooks my meals but it's not an imap server :)
#Hmmm - hearing about the trouble you're having with it makes me glad I use Gentoo Linux. One little "emerge courier-imap" and its installed - someone has already gone through the motions of getting it to work for my distro in advance.
#The sad thing is, it's not just one arrogant programmer, but the consensus of the open-source courier community to KEEP the god-awful message. Ick. Mplayer had it too back in the gcc 2.96 days.
#Hmmm, not sure if arrogant is the right word...maybe presumptuous?
#Courier-IMAP also enforces the (good advice) to do as little as possible as root. It comes across as arrogant to me.
#Oh my goodness... this frustrates me to _NO_END_...
(read more)
December 15, 2003 04:04 PM