[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#488214: make mailx a registered virtual package name

On 18.08.2010 23:38, Russ Allbery wrote:
Julien Cristau<jcristau@debian.org>  writes:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:31:59 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:

I propose the following addition.  Seconds or objections?  (As
mentioned elsewhere in the file, the * indicates that the providing
packages are using alternatives, which appears to be the case.)

Is there a spec somewhere about the command line arguments for mailx?  I
know that bsd-mailx and heirloom-mailx do completely different things
for -a, e.g., which is a major pain, and I'm not sure they should be

mailx is specified by POSIX.  POSIX does indeed not specify the -a flag.

(Out of curiosity, if one needs the -a flag to mailx, why not just call
sendmail directly and pass in exactly the headers one wants?)

What -a does?

Searching on google: two man page don't describe it,
and one as "add attachment" and one as "add header".

So I think portable scripts should not use -a

To Russ: yes, mailx was mean to replace mail and sendmail
(which is difficult to standardize, and most of sendmail
is outside POSIX scope).


Reply to: