Sam writes: > In a sitution like this, you just *don't* ship a binary package that, > after it's installed, it scribbles all over its binary files. sendmail's /etc/aliases.db is a security-critical binary file created from user-supplied configuration data. How, pray tell, are you going to check the integrity of /etc/aliases.db? If you can verify /etc/aliases.db, why can't you verify the qmail files? Well, some files are treated as config files (so they are expected to be modified), but apparently RH treats aliases.db in a special way: from the sendmail spec file (used to create the binary distribution) I see %config /etc/aliases %ghost /etc/aliases.db What is %ghost ? A germ of hope? Mate
- Re: Why Red Hat is not distrib... ddb
- Re: Why Red Hat is not distrib... Sam
- Re: Why Red Hat is not distrib... ddb
- Example of the anti-fax effect D. J. Bernstein
- Re: Example of the anti-fax ef... Sam
- Re: Example of the anti-fax ef... Russell Nelson
- Re: Why Red Hat is not distrib... Scott Schwartz
- Re: Why Red Hat is not distrib... Mate Wierdl
- Re: Why Red Hat is not distrib... Bart Blanquart
- Re: Why Red Hat is not distrib... D. J. Bernstein
- Re: Frivolous forking Mate Wierdl
- Re: Frivolous forking Mate Wierdl
- Re: Frivolous forking Mate Wierdl
- Re: Frivolous forking John Gonzalez/netMDC admin
- Re: Frivolous forking Mate Wierdl
- Re: Frivolous forking D. J. Bernstein
- Re: Frivolous forking Russell Nelson
- Re: Frivolous forking Jos Backus
- RE: Frivolous forking Jan Mikkelsen
- Running the qmail system as root D. J. Bernstein
- Re: Running the qmail system as root Russell Nelson
