On Mon, 26 Oct 1998, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 26-Oct-98, 05:59 (CST), Santiago Vila <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > And the one million dollar question:
> > Why the ugly /USR/BIN/CRON and not /usr/bin/cron?
> Because Paul Vixie wanted it that way. It's a deliberate, commented
> item in the source.
Do you mean that sendmail author is allowed to write "SENDMAIL" instead of
"sendmail" as long as it is "deliberate" ?
> > Is there not a policy about this?
> > Does every daemon have the right to uppercase its name or just cron has
> > that right? Is there any item in policy about this exception?
> I hope there's not policy about this. It's strictly a cosmetic thing,
> and I find it to be a useful cosemetic thing, in that it clearly denotes
> the spawned cron tasks.
Ok, sendmail should then uppercase itself too, so that it clearly denotes
the sendmail processes.
This is like saying that the Subject of a mailing list should always
automatically contain the name of the list [debian-devel], so that it is
> Yes, every daemon has the right to do whatever
> it wants with its name.
If this is true, it should be written in the policy.
"223bfe3ee260deee5482e4a043895622" (a truly random sig)