Am Montag, 19. September 2011, 09:56:47 schrieb Pat Riehecky:
> On 09/19/2011 08:52 AM, Alec T. Habig wrote:
> > Dennis Schridde writes:
> >> So it is indeed a bug? How should I progress from here? (I did not see
> >> a
> >> bugtracker on the website.)
> > 
> > Since very few packages actually belong to SL (as opposed to TUV, who
> > have their own bugzilla), we just say on the mailing list: "Hey Connie
> > and Pat, here's an easily fixed bug!"
> > 
> > Specifically, please add a mailx dependency to yum-autoupdate.
> > 
> > Low tech but it works :)   Reminds me of a "Letterman" cartoon episode,
> > 
> > for example:
> >    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3y_H3SaoAY&feature=results_video&p
> >    laynext=1&list=PLBE024B04B63BF3E8
> Adding it shouldn't be too much work, but from the distribution side we
> don't want to force all our users to run a "sending only" mail server
> (or more) unless they actually want to.  I might instead add a check in
> the script where, if sending mail doesn't look possible, it simply
> doesn't try to send it.  That way people don't have to worry about
> surprise software installation on their next update.  I know I'd freak
> out if suddenly my system is running sendmail/postfix when it wasn't before.
It does not seem that mailx requires sendmail/postfix (says "rpm -qR mailx"). 
So adding the dependency should be safe.

--Dennis