Stop yelling at people about the minimum sendmail version

RESOLVED FIXED in Bugzilla 2.16

Status

()

defect
RESOLVED FIXED
15 years ago
7 years ago

People

(Reporter: justdave, Assigned: goobix)

Tracking

2.17.7
Bugzilla 2.16
Bug Flags:
approval +
blocking2.18 +
approval2.16 +
documentation +
documentation2.18 +
documentation2.16 +

Details

Attachments

(4 attachments)

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+
Assignee

Comment 3

15 years ago
Posted patch v1Splinter Review
Assignee: zach → vlad
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Assignee

Updated

15 years ago
Attachment #145733 - Flags: review?
Assignee

Updated

15 years ago
Flags: approval?
Attachment #145733 - Flags: review? → review+
Flags: documentation?
Flags: approval?
Flags: approval+
Flags: approval2.16+
Target Milestone: Bugzilla 2.18 → Bugzilla 2.16
Assignee

Comment 4

15 years ago
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: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Assignee

Updated

15 years ago
Flags: documentation2.16?
This should be an easy docs fix, just make mention of it in the prereqs section.
Flags: documentation2.18?

Comment 8

15 years ago
Same as for 2.18, but not sure of the protocol, and better to be safe than
sorry.

Updated

15 years ago
Attachment #164212 - Flags: review?(documentation)

Updated

15 years ago
Attachment #164213 - Flags: review?(documentation)

Updated

15 years ago
Attachment #164214 - Flags: review?(documentation)
Assignee

Updated

15 years ago
Attachment #164212 - Flags: review?(documentation) → review+
Assignee

Comment 9

15 years ago
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+
Assignee

Comment 10

15 years ago
Comment on attachment 164214 [details] [diff] [review]
Doc changes for tip (2.19.1)

Same here.
Attachment #164214 - Flags: review?(documentation) → review+
Assignee

Comment 11

15 years ago
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.