Bug Terrorism
No, you're not hiding this on the bug tracking system any more.
The reason that sendmail broke is that you made a DELIBERATE modification
to procmail that sendmail wasn't expecting. While I agree that sendmail
should probably be more graceful about handling it, it is not a
release-critical error. A vast majority of people (like everyone but you)
don't go breaking procmail for the fun of it. It is NOT SENDMAIL's FAULT
that you broke it's MDA. I really don't understand why people want to
blame sendmail when they do stupid things like this.
I'm sorry, but I really think you're being an ass over this. You've been
provided with a workaround to make sendmail use deliver. I will provide
it again in case you can't look it up in the bug tracking system.
define(`LOCAL_MAILER_PATH', `/usr/bin/deliver')
define(`LOCAL_MAILER_ARGS', `deliver -r $g $u')
define(`LOCAL_MAILER_FLAGS', `DFMlmns')
Both the maintainer and I (as a concerned third party and maintainer of
deliver) don't think this is important enough to hold up hamm.
On Wed, 17 Jun 1998, Herbert Xu wrote:
> severity 23000 important
> quit
>
> Scott Ellis wrote:
> > severity 23000 standard
> >
> > This is ONLY A PROBLEM FOR PEOPLE WHO ALTER PROCMAIL UNEXPECTEDLY. THIS
> > IS NOT A PROBLEM FOR MOST STANDARD CONFIGURATIONS. THERE IS A PERFECTLY
> > USEFUL WORKAROUND TO CONFIGURE SENDMAIL TO USE DELIVER INSTEAD. This is
> > therefore NOT release critical.
>
> Anyone can lose emails due to this which can be easily fixed by doing a
> stat in sensible-mda.
--
Scott K. Ellis <storm@gate.net> http://www.gate.net/~storm/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: