Re: Bug#19129: sendmail: support PPP links --- use /etc/ppp/ip-up.d
"Manoj" == Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com> writes:
>>> "aph" == aph <aph@debian.org> writes:
aph> Package: sendmail Version: N/A
aph> You ought to have a little shell script in
aph> /etc/ppp/ip-up.d/sendmail, make that a conffile. This script
aph> could flush the queue when the link comes up. Here's an example:
aph> [ -x /usr/sbin/sendmail ] && /usr/sbin/sendmail -q
[... etc...]
> Umm, no. No way. I have all these programs, and no way in heck
> to I want weird stuff like this going off automatically. Please
> discuss stuff like this in debian-policy before firing off mass
> bugs.
"Mass bugs"? I hardly think < 6 bug reports, individually worded, and
you must admit decent thought out, constitutes a "mass bug mailing".
Furthermore, all the ones I filed were wishlist level, not even a bug.
Let's not sink into hysteria, here, Manoj.
> This is not policy, and for good reason: the ip-up.d idea does
> not seem to have been thought through.
Your opinion; not the opinion of the great mass of people on
debian-devel, the exim maintainer, the ppp maintainer, the fetchmail
maintainer, and myself. If you disagree with the concept of
/etc/ppp/ip-up.d, then I suggest you review the January conversations
on debian-devel (which was unanimously approving, if you'll please
note, Manoj), think it over, and maybe submit a bug against ppp or a
followup to debian-devel?
> Just because I have bind does not mean I want things to be
> uploaded, or if I have sendmail that I want a queue run when the
> connection comes up,
Alright, I'll admit the wishlist against bind could stand some more
thinking about than I probably gave it. The bind wish is debatable.
As for the MTA, why on earth would you *not* want the MTA to fire off
the mail queue when the link comes up? (And MTAs were the majority of
the targets for my wishes here). I'm sitting here scratching my head
and wonding why you wouldn't want outbound mail to in fact get a kick
in the butt and go out when the link comes up, and say I have multiple
links, what's the big bother?
> If the directory and scripts make things easier for people,
> Fine. But there should be a means of turning thisng on and off
> easily.
Yuh! That's why I suggested they be conffiles! And hey, they're
even under /etc. ;)
> There is no easy way, short of hacking or removing the
> scripts to suddenly have junk happening when I do not wish it to.
Oh come on --- *conffile*
> I suggest that there be a File in /etc/ppp/IP-config or
> something. Then have all scripts in ip-{up,down}.d/ look for
> ^sendmail.*UP=YES and ^sendmail.*DOWN=YES to run things in the
> respective states.
Blah, blech. We don't have that for cron, we don't have it for
init.d. What the heck is wrong with chmod a-x <file>?
> I am considering filing important Bugs against packages that
> make my life harder by suddenly doing things at IP-up and down,
> which I did not authorize.
I agree that the one against bind may well be either close or shipped
by default off (i.e., mode 644 rather than 755).
[rest of Manoj's message clipped]
.....A. P. Harris...apharris@onShore.com...<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
Reply to: