>> meanwhile...i like it and i've tamed the savage beast.  the
>> configuration file is only obtuse to those that don't understand it.
>> think of it like a device drive for an ethernet card written in
>> assembly language as viewed by someone who has only coded in basic.
>> it's *bound* to look obtuse.
>
>Thanks, but no thanks.  I can do pretty much whatever I need to with a
>sendmail.cf file -- but because it's difficult for NO GOOD REASON, I choose
>not to.

it's difficult in the same way that regular expressions are difficult.

>The fact that I don't *like* a programming language doesn't mean that I
>don't *know* it.

if you don't know it, you can't opine.  if you do know it, then you
realize that the syntax of the config file has *nothing what so ever*
to do with the terms on the licence, which is the root of my question.

i don't like brussels sprouts, but that's not why they're not in the
tree.  they're not in the tree because the licence on them requires
that they be eaten instead of compiled.

-- 
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org             * "ah!  i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"
andrew@crossbar.com       * "information is power -- share the wealth."