Hi, Dale.
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Dale Woolridge wrote:
>I was looking into how much work would be involved in getting
>vmailmgr working with binc. As it stands, the current use
>There are still good reasons not to use environment variables
>for passing passwords to sub-processes. Shouldn't an alternative
>be considered?
I am willing to consider another approach if you can point me to
information about why it's a bad idea. I searched on google groups a bit
and all I found was people that recommended this behavior over other
solutions. :/
>I'm seeking advice from the binc community about how best to
>approach the vmailmgr problem. Some of my own ideas:
> 1. write a replacement for bincimap-uidpwd which honours
> the MAILDIR environment variable and includes it as
> the trailing part of <dir> in its output. This means
> that: vmailmgr's default-maildir would have to be
> changed depending on virtual/system user; or binc's
> conf setting Mailbox { path = "" } would be required.
This is definitely the best. The bincimap-uidpwd program is extremely
simple - it just reports uid, gid and pwd. If you write a replacement (in
perl/bash that adds $MAILDIR to the pwd path, that will suffice. Remember
to set Mailbox { path = ""; } in the conf file.
> 3. have the authenticator also return the maildir.
> if absent, the binc conf setting would be used.
This is in practise what the uidpwd program is meant to do. :-)
The authenticator can change to new directories as much as is needed,
because in the end it's bincimapd that changes (and/or chroots) to the
Maildir.
>The issue of checkvpw requiring a Maildir argument, which it
>always tries to rewrite, remains a problem, so a checkvpw
>replacement/patch seems quite reasonable too.
Contributions are accepted with open arms. :-)
Andy
--
Andreas Aardal Hanssen | http://www.andreas.hanssen.name/gpg
Author of Binc IMAP | Nil desperandum
