Bug#42052: PROPOSAL] /var/mail and /var/spool/mail

[Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>]

On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:

> [...]
> To do this I suggest we ammend policy first by replacing all existing
> instances of /var/spool/mail with /var/mail and then changing the second
> paragraph of section 5.6 which currently reads
> 
>    The mail spool is /var/spool/mail and the interface to send a mail
>    message is /usr/sbin/sendmail (as per the FHS). The mail spool is part
>    of the base system and not part of the MTA package.
> 
> to the following:
> 
>    The mail spool is /var/mail and the interface to send a mail message is
>    /usr/sbin/sendmail (as per the FHS).  The mail spool is part of the
>    base system and any package requiring use øf /var/mail must declare
>    dependency on base-files (>= #BASEFILESVER#).
> 
> 
> Also, a new section should be inserted after section 3.1.2 containing the
> following:
> 
>   3.1.3 The system mail spool
> 
>    While the FHS mandates the mail spool be accessable as /var/mail, it is
>    important to retain compatibility with older packages and locally
>    compiled programs.  Packages using the mail spool should use /var/mail
>    and declare dependency on base-files (>= #BASEFILESVER#).

I second this proposal, but please change the word "dependency"
by "Pre-Dependency" (otherwise I would formally object ;-).

Rationale: base-files (>=whatever) must be unpacked and *configured*
before *any* package using /var/mail is *unpacked*, because the symlink
/var/mail -> /var/spool/mail will be handled in base-files' postinst.

[ Try to think what happens if an important program start to access
  /var/mail without /var/mail being there yet ].

BTW: The footnote pointed out by Antti-Juhani should be reworded also.
(Yes, this is the footnote saying we should still follow /var/spool/mail
regardless of what FHS says).

Thanks.

-- 
 "9646ee6e65c45b4fb4034ce347d9e7f0" (a truly random sig)