From jaco@titine.fr.eu.org  Sun Apr 22 10:03:50 2001
Return-Path: <jaco@titine.fr.eu.org>
Received: from musique.teaser.fr (musique.teaser.net [213.91.2.11])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5D3537B423
	for <FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org>; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 10:03:49 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from jaco@titine.fr.eu.org)
Received: from titine.fr.eu.org (Cour-N1D41-231.teaser.net [213.91.41.231])
	by musique.teaser.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 920897254C
	for <FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org>; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 19:03:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by titine.fr.eu.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id AF96A339F; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 19:03:06 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <20010422170306.AF96A339F@titine.fr.eu.org>
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 19:03:06 +0200 (CEST)
From: jaco@teaser.fr
Reply-To: jaco@teaser.fr
To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Cc:
Subject: rmail and installworld
X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.113
X-GNATS-Notify:

>Number:         26774
>Category:       conf
>Synopsis:       Installation of rmail, even without sendmail
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    gshapiro
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          change-request
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Sun Apr 22 10:10:00 PDT 2001
>Closed-Date:    Mon Dec 10 11:33:04 PST 2001
>Last-Modified:  Mon Dec 10 11:33:47 PST 2001
>Originator:     Eric Jacoboni
>Release:        FreeBSD 4.3-STABLE i386
>Organization:
>Environment:
System: FreeBSD titine.fr.eu.org 4.3-STABLE FreeBSD 4.3-STABLE #0: Sun Apr 22 17:58:24 CEST 2001 root@titine.fr.eu.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/TITINE i386

>Description:
When NO_SENDMAIL is true, rmail is not built even if NOUUCP is false...
In fact, rmail is necessary if UUCP is used, even if sendmail is'nt 
(we mary choose another MTA, Postfix for example.

>How-To-Repeat:
make installworld with NO_SENDMAIL= true doesn't build rmail	

>Fix:
rmail has to be built if sendmail _or_ uucp are used. 

In other words, if NO_SENDMAIL is not defined _or_ NOUUCP is not defined:
 
Change the /usr/src/bin/Makefile to read:

.if !defined(NO_SENDMAIL) || !defined(NOUUCP)
SUBDIR+=rmail
.endif


>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:

From: Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com>
To: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, jaco@teaser.fr
Cc:  
Subject: Re: conf/26774: Installation of rmail, even without sendmail
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 16:13:17 +0000

 I would like to suggest that there is a better solution to this, which fixes
 another problem too.
 
 The trouble is that rmail is very sendmail-specific. For example, if I
 install exim 3.22, and change mailer.conf so that /usr/sbin/sendmail invokes
 exim, rmail does not work:
 
 bash# /bin/rmail testuser
 From root
 Subject: test
 exim abandoned: unknown, malformed, or incomplete option -G
 
 My preferred solution is therefore as follows. When building sendmail,
 
 - install rmail as /usr/libexec/sendmail/rmail
 - /bin/rmail symlinks to /usr/sbin/mailwrapper
 - add a new entry to /etc/mail/mailer.conf:
   rmail   /usr/libexec/sendmail/rmail
 
 Since many sensible mailers (e.g. exim, smail) have 'rmail' functionality
 already, then it becomes straightforward to change this to, say,
 
 rmail	/usr/exim/bin/exim
 
 In the case where the MTA supports rmail, this means that jaco's fix is not
 necessary. But equally it doesn't do any harm to include it, as long as
 rmail is indirected through mailer.conf.
 
 Regards,
 
 Brian.

From: Eric Jacoboni <jaco@teaser.fr>
To: Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: conf/26774: Installation of rmail, even without sendmail
Date: 02 May 2001 19:21:18 +0200

 >>>>> "Brian" == Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com> writes:
 
 Brian> My preferred solution is therefore as follows. When building
 Brian> sendmail,
 
 The problem is we may need rmail without needing sendmail... As i'm
 using Postfix, i have NO_SENDMAIL in my make.conf hence rmail is never
 rebuild. My fix doesn't solve your problem but breaks the dependancy
 between sendmail build and rmail build (and solves the problem i've
 mentionned).
 
 Brian> Since many sensible mailers (e.g. exim, smail) have 'rmail'
 Brian> functionality already, then it becomes straightforward to
 Brian> change this to, say,
 
 Yep, that's perhaps another way... I've never investigated Postfix
 enough to see if the distribution provides a rmail replacement.
 
 -- 
 ric Jacoboni, n il y a 1292188590 secondes.

From: Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com>
To: Eric Jacoboni <jaco@teaser.fr>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: conf/26774: Installation of rmail, even without sendmail
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 17:39:29 +0000

 On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 07:21:18PM +0200, Eric Jacoboni wrote:
 > Brian> Since many sensible mailers (e.g. exim, smail) have 'rmail'
 > Brian> functionality already, then it becomes straightforward to
 > Brian> change this to, say,
 > 
 > Yep, that's perhaps another way... I've never investigated Postfix
 > enough to see if the distribution provides a rmail replacement.
 
 http://www.postfix.org/faq.html
 
 "You need an rmail program that extracts the sender address from mail that
 arrives via UUCP, and that feeds the mail into the Postfix sendmail
 command. Most UNIX systems come with an rmail utility. If you're in a
 pinch, try the one bundled with the Postfix source code in the auxiliary
 directory. Some day Postfix may have its own rmail command."
 
 Personally I think it should be the responsibility of a well-behaved MTA to
 provide an rmail workalike, and if the user specifies NO_SENDMAIL then they
 really don't want any part of sendmail, including its rmail (which is
 arguably sendmail-specific anyway)
 
 Regards,
 
 Brian.

From: Eric Jacoboni <jaco@teaser.fr>
To: Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: conf/26774: Installation of rmail, even without sendmail
Date: 02 May 2001 20:23:05 +0200

 >>>>> "Brian" == Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com> writes:
 
 Brian> If you're in a pinch, try the one bundled with
 Brian> the Postfix source code in the auxiliary directory. Some day
 Brian> Postfix may have its own rmail command."
 
 Ok i will give it a try...
 
 Brian> Personally I think it should be the responsibility of a
 Brian> well-behaved MTA to provide an rmail workalike, and if the user
 Brian> specifies NO_SENDMAIL then they really don't want any part of
 Brian> sendmail, including its rmail (which is arguably
 Brian> sendmail-specific anyway)
 
 I think too. May be the Postfix port should insist on it...
 
 -- 
 ric Jacoboni, n il y a 1292192266 secondes.

From: Eric Jacoboni <jaco@teaser.fr>
To: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: conf/26774: Installation of rmail, even without sendmail
Date: 02 May 2001 21:13:01 +0200

 >>>>> "Brian" == Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com> writes:
 
 Brian> http://www.postfix.org/faq.html
 
 Ok, i look at the Postfix sources and found a rmail script. I've
 tested some UUCP batches and it seems to work ok.
 
 It seems we can close this PR. I'm gonna contact the Postfix port
 maintainer to ask him to add this script in its installation.
 
 
 -- 
 ric Jacoboni, n il y a 1292195410 secondes.
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->gshapiro 
Responsible-Changed-By: kris 
Responsible-Changed-When: Sat Aug 25 14:41:06 PDT 2001 
Responsible-Changed-Why:  
Over to the sendmail maintainer 

http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=26774 
State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback 
State-Changed-By: gshapiro 
State-Changed-When: Tue Nov 13 18:49:54 PST 2001 
State-Changed-Why:  
rmail no longer uses -G so that isn't an issue.  As far as building 
even if NO_SENDMAIL is defined, I've received complaints when doing that 
as some users don't even have the sendmail source in contrib/ and the 
build will fail. 

http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=26774 
State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed 
State-Changed-By: gshapiro 
State-Changed-When: Mon Dec 10 11:33:04 PST 2001 
State-Changed-Why:  
No feedback from submitter regarding rmail change so I assume it is a good 
enough solution. 

http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=26774 
>Unformatted:
