Re: Bug#92981: uw-imapd-ssl: can't use maildir format with uw-imap (fwd)
On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Ethan Benson wrote:
> no reason for the rejection was given either. all thats mentioned in
> that bug report is that pine has `permissions issues' i fail to see
> why pine -- which is run by the *user* needs group write permission if
> you own the file and the owner has rw then you and everything you run
> has rw. if pine has some screwball requirements i don't think that
> should mandate unsecure policy. especially since pine is not even in
> debian, its non-free. besides that i installed pine on a box running
> postfix this summer and the only `permissions issue' it had was
> complaining on startup that /var/spool/mail was mode 2775 instead of
> 1777, it was only a complaint and it seemed to work fine otherwise
> (well as fine as pine `works').
I think that refered to the message that Pine would give (actually
c-client I think) warning of insecure permissions if the modes weren't
1777. As you say, that argument is bogus.
Since we aren't getting any replies here, I'm going to forward to
debian-policy (which I probably should have done in the first place.
Jaldhar H. Vyas <firstname.lastname@example.org>