Closed Bug 240060 Opened 17 years ago Closed 17 years ago

Stop yelling at people about the minimum sendmail version

Categories

(Bugzilla :: Installation & Upgrading, defect)

2.17.7
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
Bugzilla 2.16

People

(Reporter: justdave, Assigned: goobix)

Details

Attachments

(4 files)

continued from bug 239885...

Let's get rid of this warning altogether, not just for Windows folks.  It's
annoying, and confuses people into thinking it's complaining that their sendmail
version isn't new enough, which in fact, it prints it regardless because it has
no way to know.  I haven't seen a machine with sendmail older than 8.9 on it in
years, so this isn't worth throwing in everyone's face anymore.  The 8.7 prereq
is a matter for the documentation now.
Justdave,

Sounds good to me. Is this a blocker for 2.18?
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 2.18
Sure.
Flags: blocking2.18+
Attached patch v1Splinter Review
Assignee: zach → vlad
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #145733 - Flags: review?
Flags: approval?
Attachment #145733 - Flags: review? → review+
Flags: documentation?
Flags: approval?
Flags: approval+
Flags: approval2.16+
Target Milestone: Bugzilla 2.18 → Bugzilla 2.16
Checking in checksetup.pl;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/checksetup.pl,v  <--  checksetup.pl
new revision: 1.276; previous revision: 1.275
done

Checking in checksetup.pl;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/checksetup.pl,v  <--  checksetup.pl
new revision: 1.149.2.24; previous revision: 1.149.2.23
done
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Flags: documentation2.16?
This should be an easy docs fix, just make mention of it in the prereqs section.
Flags: documentation2.18?
Same as for 2.18, but not sure of the protocol, and better to be safe than
sorry.
Attachment #164212 - Flags: review?(documentation)
Attachment #164213 - Flags: review?(documentation)
Attachment #164214 - Flags: review?(documentation)
Attachment #164212 - Flags: review?(documentation) → review+
Comment on attachment 164213 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for 2.18

The first -/+ changeset includes a very large line that could fit very well on
two lines :-) (we try to keep those at 80 chars maximum)
Attachment #164213 - Flags: review?(documentation) → review+
Comment on attachment 164214 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for tip (2.19.1)

Same here.
Attachment #164214 - Flags: review?(documentation) → review+
Checking in docs/xml/installation.xml;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/xml/installation.xml,v  <-- 
installation.xml
new revision: 1.72.2.9; previous revision: 1.72.2.8
done

Checking in docs/xml/installation.xml;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/xml/installation.xml,v  <-- 
installation.xml
new revision: 1.81; previous revision: 1.80
done

Checking in docs/xml/installation.xml;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/xml/installation.xml,v  <-- 
installation.xml
new revision: 1.18.2.20; previous revision: 1.18.2.19
done
Flags: documentation?
Flags: documentation2.18?
Flags: documentation2.18+
Flags: documentation2.16?
Flags: documentation2.16+
Flags: documentation+
QA Contact: matty_is_a_geek → default-qa
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.