On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 01:07:52PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 09:48:43AM +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote:
mail is and always has been a standard system account:
mail is also the account that owns the mail spool, hence all MUAs
run sgid mail per policy. Running the MTA as mail
On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 23:35, Marc Haber wrote:
I never did understand: what was the problem with mail?
First, installing exim4 would probably re-use the account mail which
might be assigned to a user. This might grant excessive rights to that
user (for example, access rights to the mail
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 09:48:43AM +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote:
mail is and always has been a standard system account:
mail is also the account that owns the mail spool, hence all MUAs
run sgid mail per policy. Running the MTA as mail as well would mean
that the MTA's queue would have to belong
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 01:07:52PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 09:48:43AM +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote:
mail is and always has been a standard system account:
mail is also the account that owns the mail spool, hence all MUAs
run sgid mail per policy. Running the MTA as
On Mon, 2004-09-20 at 19:47, Tim Kelley wrote:
So we shouldn't purge the mail queue and hints database? Since policy
requires a purged package to vanish without leaving any trace of its
installation, that would be a policy violation.
Huh? There is no such policy. The policy defines purge
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 10:00:36AM -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 07:55:48PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok, I know this has been brought up on the list, but I just want to vent my
frustration at this fine distribution picking such a horrible username for
exim4!
On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 21:01, Marc Haber wrote:
I believe this was done because there is some Debian policy that a
weird user name must be created in this case.
No, the weird account name was chosen in absense of a formal policy
to minimize the chance of clashes with account names
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 10:26:01PM +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote:
On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 21:01, Marc Haber wrote:
I believe this was done because there is some Debian policy that a
weird user name must be created in this case.
No, the weird account name was chosen in absense of a formal policy
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 10:26:01PM +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote:
On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 21:01, Marc Haber wrote:
I believe this was done because there is some Debian policy that a
weird user name must be created in this case.
No, the weird account name was chosen in absense of a formal
Marc Haber writes:
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 10:26:01PM +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote:
I never did understand: what was the problem with mail?
First, installing exim4 would probably re-use the account mail which
might be assigned to a user. This might grant excessive rights to that
user (for
10 matches
Mail list logo
