Neil Bothwick schrieb:
On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 14:27:22 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> Sending mail with directly speaking SMTP isn't. That's the job
>> of a MTA.
>
> What if you don't have an MTA installed, which is how this question
> arose?
Then you install one.
That's not an acceptable answer for a core system service.
Yes, it is, as sending out mail isn't a core system service.
Portage
should, and can, be able to do its job using the standard Python mail
transport methods.
Portage can only send out mail after a network connection has been
setup. Thus, we're already after the "core system setup". Finally,
system software like some cron daemons (eg. fcron) already depend
on an MTA (although I don't quite understand, why fcron depends on
an MTA and vixie-cron doesn't. This doesn't make sense to me.).
> Talking SMTP is how all my mail-sending software communicates with
> it.
cron?
Fair comment, I forgot about that one, which uses ssmtp.
No, it doesn't use ssmtp, it uses /usr/sbin/sendmail.
Now, ssmtp provides this "interface", that's of course true. But
cron works equally well, if the ssmtp MTA is replaced by, say, postfix.
In my defence,
our month-old grandson stayed with us last night - sleep-deprivation is a
b*******!
;) Tell me about it. It's so freaking hot in Germany lately, that
it's hard to find sleep (at least for me it is hard).
>> > Why not let portage work with the same SMTP server you use for all
>> > other mail?
>>
>> Why make me configure SMTP in two places (MTA and Portage)?
>
> That's a separate question.
No, it's not.
It is, but it doesn't matter.You should not be "made" to configure mail
in two places if you have an MTA, I never disagreed with that. But
equally, you should not be forced to install an MTA.
But you aren't forced - by default, portage doesn't even send out
mails. The user has to configure this.
But it would actually be *very* easy to make this a default, if
the IMO stupid dependency on SMTP would be dumped. If it were,
it could always use /usr/sbin/sendmail to send mails to, lets
say, [EMAIL PROTECTED] and the user could then set up an alias
to get the mail to the wanted place. No *NEED* to configure the
recipient address in make.conf anymore.
Now, if there isn't a (working) /usr/sbin/sendmail, then
no mail is sent out. Just like it's now right after install.
But as soon as standard methods (/usr/sbin/sendmail) become
available, portage mails "just work".
> It's trivial to configure portage to use a
> local MTA if you have one.
No, it's not *trivial*. It's not hard, but trivial... No.
Uncommenting the relevant line and changing the email address to your own
seems trivial to me.
That's not quite true. Eg. if you've got a username with an @, you're
in trouble, see <https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116984>.
This could be circumvented (or shifted to another place) by dumping
the use of SMTP.
> If you want to use sendmail instead, why not
> submit a bug report, preferably with a patch?
PORTAGE_ELOG_COMMAND exists. I'd rather suggest to dump the
wasteful SMTP support. But I doubt that such a good suggestion
would be welcome - rather the Windows is chosen.
It's not wasteful, as it provides an easy option for many people and it
uses existing software.
It IS wasteful, as it doesn't use existing, standard software and
as it re-implements a functionality, which is very likely to be
present already.
Look at the code and you'll see that all it does
is parse the address etc. from the config file and use it to send the
message via an smtplib function. Using sendmail would require about the
same amount of code, giving a choice of the two would only add a couple
of lines, which should suit everyone.
Here some lines, there some lines. That's how waste and bloat
is made. This bloat and waste can be circumvented, by using
standard tools.
> But don't force all those people without an MTA to install one just
> because it's easier for you.
Well, don't force me to use SMTP, just because it's easier for you!
I'm not, I didn't write portage!
That's lame :) I don't force you to do anything either, for the
exact same reason.
And also don't force me, to write "complicated" scripts, just because
it's easier for you!
It's easier for me because it's there and it works.
It's harder for me and many other people, as an MTA will very likely
be present.
So, don't force me to do something, just because it's easier for you!
If portage would use the standard ways of sending
mail, ie. /usr/sbin/sendmail, than this script wouldn't be necessary.
MAYBE SMTP could be added as an *OPTION* - but I'd not add this, it's
bloat.
It's not bloat, because the code is already there.
It is bloat, as the same function is handled by a seperate, and
more standard implementation. Function := Get mail off the system with
SMTP.
> Or
> will ssmtp handle this correctly?
What "this"?
Sending mail from portage as per the OP's question.
No, SSMTP doesn't do this, as Portage doesn't use standard
Unix ways to send out mail, because Portage only can do
SMTP and not use /usr/sbin/sendmail. The OP wanted to talk to
localhost - ssmtp isn't a SMTP server, and thus doesn't listen
on localhost.
With my howto, /usr/sbin/sendmail is used to send out
mail. Benefit of this is, that the "SMTP configuration" (ie. name
of (smart-)host and possibly username+password) only has to be set
at one spot - in the configuration file of the MTA. What MTA is
chosen, is basically upto the user - but Gentoo seems to prefer
ssmtp, which is totally fine and also is, what I'd suggest, as ssmtp
is so easy to configure and offer's all, that's needed.
As I said, file a request on bugzilla. It sounds a reasonable option.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=141513
Alexander Skwar
--
"I am ... a woman ... and ... technically a parasitic uterine growth"
-- Sean Doran the Younger [allegedly]
--
[email protected] mailing list
