Re: RFC: Making mail-transport-agent Priority: optional
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:57:29PM +0200, Frank Steinborn wrote:
> > Josh Triplett wrote:
> > > ...which produce output to somewhere other than a log file, in some
> > > scenario other than "being buggy and accidentally producing output", and
> > > which expect end users to read their output, and which therefore expect
> > > that the end user has configured root's mail to go somewhere they'll
> > > actually read.
> > I have a strong opinion on the whole thread, but I'll just want to
> > answer this one because I'm not a DD anyway:
> > Are you aware of the fact that all of roots mail gets forwarded to the
> > user configured in d-i? This is a non-argument. As a user, you will be
> > bugged everytime for new mail on login. Check /etc/aliases after a
> > fresh install.
> Yes, I'm aware. Note that graphical logins will not normally tell the
> user about new local mail, and neither will most graphical MUAs.
Something to be fixed. Although the "warn of local mail" part is rather
trivial, we have such notification applets for all DEs.
I seem to recall our super duper memory-bloated DEs were not even
warning the user when something was screaming blood murder on the
emergency, alert and critical priorities in syslog until wheezy... That
absurd negligence has been fixed, AFAIK, at least in KDE4. I assume
gnome is no worse, and also notifies the user.
I do know many of the GUI MUAs are incomplete jack-jobs that fail to add
a handler for local system folders (i.e. were only partially ported to
Linux). I am not sure which would be the better aproach to deal with
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot