Jason R. Mastaler wrote:

> "Jesse D. Guardiani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
>> One thing I noticed is that when a message is released (and
>> maybe when a message is deleted too), tmda-pending actually
>> pipes the message through the sendmail interface instead of
>> doing the work directly.
> 
> [...]
> 
>> Would anyone object to the abstraction of this functionality
>> (release and delete) into a different class or having
>> tmda-pending call tmda-filter directly?
> 
> The reason TMDA "re-injects" a message to get it delivered is so that
> it doesn't have to re-invent the behavior of the MTA's local delivery
> agent.
> 
> For example, what if my final delivery instruction looks like this:
> 
> DELIVERY="| /home/jason/bin/myprog"
> 
> `myprog' may relay on one or more of the environment variables setup
> by qmail-local (see qmail-command(8).  By re-injecting the message and
> allowing qmail-local to deliver it, TMDA doesn't need to have any
> knowledge of those environment variables.

OK, Understood. The only thing I'm having problems with is the setting of
the pending message filename flags. If there is a delay in their being set,
then the user sees the lag as a failed release or delete.

Would it be conceivable to set those flags with tmda-pending BEFORE
handing the message off to sendmail? Or would that cause problems if the
delivery failed?


-- 
Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator
WingNET Internet Services,
P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605
423-559-LINK (v)  423-559-5145 (f)
http://www.wingnet.net

We are actively looking for companies that do a lot of long
distance faxing and want to cut their long distance bill by
up to 50%.  Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info.

_________________________________________________
tmda-workers mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers

Reply via email to