Hi Ken,
> > Yes. sendmail had to be run as /usr/lib/sendmail IIRC, so not in
> > PATH normally
...
> So I really can't justify (or coherently explain) why one invocation
> of sendmail uses execvp() and the other does not.
Yes, I'm not arguing that PATH shouldn't be used today, I'm just
rememberi
Cyber wrote:
> I am using sendmail/pipe.
Thanks, that makes sense.
Though sendmail/pipe imposes limitations on the use of post, as
noted in the mh-tailor(5) documentation.
David
--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
>
> And I must note that I don't understand why changing the execv()
> works. Cyber uses:
>
> sendmail: sendmail
>
> which is sendmail/smtp. But the execv() is only used with
> sendmail/pipe. Cyber, can you show us your post.c diff?
I am using sendmail/pipe. I have
mts: sendmail/pipe
in my co
Ken wrote:
> Ah, the "sendmail:" option is the name of the sendmail executable to use.
> You're thinking of the "mts:" option
Oh yes, thanks.
> (I see there is a documentation bug;
> mts.conf(5) should say that "sendmail:" is available if you use sendmail/smtp
> or sendmail/pipe).
Yup.
David
>And I must note that I don't understand why changing the execv()
>works. Cyber uses:
>
> sendmail: sendmail
>
>which is sendmail/smtp. But the execv() is only used with
>sendmail/pipe. Cyber, can you show us your post.c diff?
Ah, the "sendmail:" option is the name of the sendmail executable t
Ken wrote:
> So, solutions. You can (a) change post.c to use execvp() instead of
> execv(), (b) continue using your wrapper script, or (c) switch to
> submitting your mail via SMTP (either direct SMTP to a mail server
> or via sendmail using "sendmail/smtp").
I wonder if the -sendmail switch add
>Yes. sendmail had to be run as /usr/lib/sendmail IIRC, so not in PATH
>normally, and Arch's exim and esmtp package both still provide a
>/usr/lib/sendmail, for compatibility, I assume.
Right, buuut the OTHER (more common, at least in terms of nmh)
use of sendmail, running it using -bs a
Hi Ken,
> > I think execvp(3) is being used, so PATH is searched?
>
> In fact ... it is not.
Sorry!
> I suspect that it was intended
Yes. sendmail had to be run as /usr/lib/sendmail IIRC, so not in PATH
normally, and Arch's exim and esmtp package both still provide a
/usr/lib/sendmail, for com
>
> So, solutions. You can (a) change post.c to use execvp() instead of
> execv(), (b) continue using your wrapper script, or (c) switch to
> submitting your mail via SMTP (either direct SMTP to a mail server
> or via sendmail using "sendmail/smtp").
Solution (a) solved my problem.
Thanks for t
>> sendmail: sendmail
>> it complains that it cannot find the file.
>
>I think execvp(3) is being used, so PATH is searched?
In fact ... it is not.
It turns out we use execvp() exclusively ... except for this one case.
The code we use in post.c was incorporated from spost.c, and that also
only us
Hi,
It does not recurse because the file is called sendmaill with double ll.
with
sendmail: sendmail
in my mts.conf
I get the error
post: can't exec sendmail: No such file or directory
But with
sendmail: /home/cyber/.local/bin/sendmaill
in my mts.conf it works properly. even though sendmaill i
Hi Cyber,
> I use NixOS
So there's no /bin, etc., as we know it.
> sendmail: sendmail
> it complains that it cannot find the file.
I think execvp(3) is being used, so PATH is searched?
> Right now I am using a very ugly hack, I have made an executable
> sendmaill file in my home directory that
12 matches
Mail list logo
