Mailing List Archive

FSSTD is linux specific?
Ira Abramov writes:
> On 23 Feb 1997, Russell Nelson wrote:
>
> > Ira Abramov writes:
> >
> > > - clean up the last few backward compatabilities with sendmail

Ahhh, I didn't realize you meant /var/qmail/bin/sendmail.

> > > - find a nice solution for people used to using .forward
> >
> > .forward is badly documented. In most cases .forward can be renamed
> > to .qmail.
>
> yes, but go and send the word about it to a 1500 user system. 100 messages
> will pong "how do I rename it?" and 400 more will be "what is .forward?"

And how do *you* explain how .forward works when a user asks you??

> I think the users shouldn't care what the mail server is. I have users
> coming in and creating .forward files without asking... I don't envy
> admins of big systems having to explain to every new yet experianced user
> that comes through the door that .forward is dead, and .qmail is the one
> to use... people like to import all their dot files and expect to go on
> working as usual.

Essentially you are saying that Unix should never be improved,
because, even though it makes Unix easier to learn and use, it would
confuse experienced users. Sorry, but I have no sympathy for this idea.

> at any rate, like many here said, /var is NOT a place for binaries for
> many more than one reason. I'll symlink my installation out of there, but
> it IS something to look at. I have no prolonged experiance with Unices,
> but I have yet to find standard distributions, especially ones that are
> freewares or GPLed and the like and are classified under "contrib" that
> have the "nerve" to use /var for binaries :)

/var is for files that are specific to the system they are on. The
qmail binaries and man pages are specific to the system they are on.
You may agree or disagree that *this* is the right thing to do, but
/var is the right place for those files.

--
-russ <nelson@crynwr.com> http://www.crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr Software sells network driver support | PGP ok
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | Peace, Justice, Freedom:
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | pick two (only mostly true)
RE: FSSTD is linux specific? [ In reply to ]
On 23-Feb-97 Russell Nelson wrote:
>/var is for files that are specific to the system they are on. The
>qmail binaries and man pages are specific to the system they are on.
>You may agree or disagree that *this* is the right thing to do, but
>/var is the right place for those files.
At least *you* think so. I'm NOT agree with you, there are many system
specific files wich is NOT under /var an not just linux eg. on Solaris.
Actualy I didn't search throw /var but I don't remember to binaris under /var.

-- Levente

---------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: Levente Farkas <lfarkas@ohsh.u-szeged.hu>
Homepage: http://www.inf.u-szeged.hu/~lfarkas/
Finger for PGP public key & Geek Code: lfarkas@sol.cc.u-szeged.hu
This message was sent by XF-Mail, Date: 02/23/97 Time: 16:30:29
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: FSSTD is linux specific? [ In reply to ]
On 23 Feb 1997, Russell Nelson wrote:

> > > .forward is badly documented. In most cases .forward can be renamed
> > > to .qmail.
> >
> > yes, but go and send the word about it to a 1500 user system. 100 messages
> > will pong "how do I rename it?" and 400 more will be "what is .forward?"
>
> And how do *you* explain how .forward works when a user asks you??

I don't tell newbies about features unless they need them, that saves me a
lot of help desk work, but if a non-newbie steps in and asks me why
doesn't my system acknowladge his .forward file, or worse, I could have a
user leave a .forward without verifying it works, and fly to Madagascar
for 2 monthes, and his mailbox will overflow. so now I should stick a
symlink by default in all the directories, as part of my /etc/skel ?

.qmail is a superset of .forward, is it not? so why a new filename? my
golden rule says: drive the sysadmin nuts if needed to get you somewhere
better, but don't try and educate the users by force.

> Essentially you are saying that Unix should never be improved,
> because, even though it makes Unix easier to learn and use, it would
> confuse experienced users. Sorry, but I have no sympathy for this idea.

no, I am saying Unix is one of the most amazingly adaptable platforms, but
users are not. calling a file by another name without giving it extra
functionality is a useless move...

example: my webserver defaults to looking for an index.html in the
requested directory, but some of my users come from other backgrounds, so
if it doesn't find it, it will look for index.htm, then default.htm, then
home.htm then index.txt, then index.cgi and only THEN it will give up.

how about qmail looking for ~/.qmail, then .forward if non-existant, and
then default to deliver as usual? looks like the right "UNIXy" solution.

> > at any rate, like many heresaid, /var is NOT a place for binaries for
> > many more than one reason. I'll symlink my installation out of there, but
> > it IS something to look at. I have no prolonged experiance with Unices,
> > but I have yet to find standard distributions, especially ones that are
> > freewares or GPLed and the like and are classified under "contrib" that
> > have the "nerve" to use /var for binaries :)
>
> /var is for files that are specific to the system they are on. The
nope, that's what /usr/local is for. /usr/local/bin, /usr/local/etc,
/usr/local/var.

> qmail binaries and man pages are specific to the system they are on.
oh yeah? and if I have a cluster of 10 machines and they all run sendmail,
are they machine specific then too?

stop thinking of Qmail as a per-host added feature and start looking at it
as a standard part of distributions if you want to see it hit the big
time... the old sendmil is in /usr/sbin on my Linux, why not have all the
qmail binaries there too?

> You may agree or disagree that *this* is the right thing to do, but
> /var is the right place for those files.

like saying that logs go into /etc, because that is machine specific :(
Re: FSSTD is linux specific? [ In reply to ]
> And how do *you* explain how .forward works when a user asks you??

For basic use, op.me is relatively clear. "As an alternative to the
alias database, any user may put a file with the name .forward in his
or her home directory. If this file exists, sendmail redirects mail
for the user to the list of addresses listed in the .forward file."
It then gives an example which indicates that you separate the list of
addresses with newlines.

Unfortunately, intro.me makes it clear that you can also put
"|mailer-program args" in the .forward file, but I think it would be
perfectly reasonable for qmail to only implement simple
address-forwarding in a .forward file.

> Essentially you are saying that Unix should never be improved,

Users shouldn't have to use different files to set up mail forwarding
on different systems just because those systems are using different
MTAs. The .qmail file is not an improvement, because it is
deliberately MTA-specific, by name.

> /var is for files that are specific to the system they are on.

Can you provide a reference for this somewhat extraordinary claim? I
have, from the BSD 4.4 hier(7):

/var/ multi-purpose log, temporary, transient, and spool files

Certainly, if /var is for files that are specific to the system they
are on, one might start to wonder what /etc is for.

> The qmail binaries and man pages are specific to the system they are
> on.

Unless you're referring to the hardcoded uids (which even you agree is
a botch), I don't think the qmail binaries and man pages are specific
to more than the operating system they were compiled for.

Of course, as you said, we've been over this. Dan has stated that, if
I want to actually conform to the Unix filesystem semi-standards, I
should set qmailhome to /etc/qmail and make symlinks from there out to
/usr/local/bin and wherever else. If I want to comment those
symlinks, I should indirect them through a filename like
"/etc/qmail/This is where qmail looks for its spool directory", and
hope that I don't want to use the same comment for two different
symlinks. When I said that Dan's ideas were awfully ugly when applied
to the world of all software packages, he didn't seem to agree.

One last comment on things you've said, Nelson. You've said you hope
the "serious distributors" will do the work necessary to integrate
qmail into their systems, but there are systems like NetBSD which are
predicated on the idea that they are freely redistributable, lock,
stock, and barrel, including modified versions. Half-assed free
software like qmail (or xforms, or QT, or Bostic's DB version 2, or
gated, etc.) can never be distributed with such operating systems. It
would be a shame to restrict qmail to distribution in commercial
operating systems.

(By "half-assed free software" I mean software which you can get
without paying for it, but for which certain uses, such as commercial
use or distribution of derivative works, are tied to the consent of a
particular owner. The software is "free" in the sense that there is
no charge, but not "free" in the sense that it can exist and evolve
independent of its original author.)
Re: FSSTD is linux specific? [ In reply to ]
'op.me' might be clear on how '.forward' works, but this is not very helpful.
Which users actually read this?

>Users shouldn't have to use different files to set up mail forwarding
>on different systems just because those systems are using different
>MTAs. The .qmail file is not an improvement, because it is deliberately
>MTA-specific, by name.

I am not sure if you are just objecting to the name, or if you are objecting
to the fact that qmail does not parse a '.forward' file. Should I object to
the fact that it doesn't parse the following

sender firewalls-owner@greatcircle.com pipe ? /usr/mmdf/rcv/mail2news -a ccsis@bath.ac.uk -n bath.mailing-lists.firewalls
sender owner-www-security@ns2.rutgers.edu pipe ? /usr/mmdf/rcv/mail2news -a ccsis@bath.ac.uk -n bath.mailing-lists.www-security
default - > A .mail

which is part of my '.maildelivery', the MMDF equivalent of sendmails
'.forward'? Of course not. One of the costs of putting in a new mail system
is that of user education. Of course we try and make it easy for users, so
we have a 'forwardmail' command which sets up simple mail forwarding, and
programs to set up vacation and so on. It is easy for us to automatically
fix files for people who use these tools. If others know enough to set up
the files themselves, then they should know enough to fix things themselves.

Memory tells me that sendmail can use a comma instead of a newline as a
delimiter in a .forward file. If so, how would you want

|vacation fred , \fred

parsed by qmail? As one command with 3 arguements or as a program with
one arguement and a second address? If the latter, then why, and if the
former then you are breaking the biggest use of '.forward' files that
most sites see.

Icarus
Re: FSSTD is linux specific? [ In reply to ]
'op.me' might be clear on how '.forward' works, but this is not very helpful.
Which users actually read this?

>Users shouldn't have to use different files to set up mail forwarding
>on different systems just because those systems are using different
>MTAs. The .qmail file is not an improvement, because it is deliberately
>MTA-specific, by name.

I am not sure if you are just objecting to the name, or if you are objecting
to the fact that qmail does not parse a '.forward' file. Should I object to
the fact that it doesn't parse the following

sender firewalls-owner@greatcircle.com pipe ? /usr/mmdf/rcv/mail2news -a ccsis@bath.ac.uk -n bath.mailing-lists.firewalls
sender owner-www-security@ns2.rutgers.edu pipe ? /usr/mmdf/rcv/mail2news -a ccsis@bath.ac.uk -n bath.mailing-lists.www-security
default - > A .mail

which is part of my '.maildelivery', the MMDF equivalent of sendmails
'.forward'? Of course not. One of the costs of putting in a new mail system
is that of user education. Of course we try and make it easy for users, so
we have a 'forwardmail' command which sets up simple mail forwarding, and
programs to set up vacation and so on. It is easy for us to automatically
fix files for people who use these tools. If others know enough to set up
the files themselves, then they should know enough to fix things themselves.

Memory tells me that sendmail can use a comma instead of a newline as a
delimiter in a .forward file. If so, how would you want

|vacation fred , \fred

parsed by qmail? As one command with 3 arguements or as a program with
one arguement and a second address? If the latter, then why, and if the
former then you are breaking the biggest use of '.forward' files that
most sites see.

Icarus
Re: FSSTD is linux specific? [ In reply to ]
In message <19970223150946.4118.qmail@desk.crynwr.com>, Russell Nelson writes:
>/var is for files that are specific to the system they are on. The
>qmail binaries and man pages are specific to the system they are on.
>You may agree or disagree that *this* is the right thing to do, but
>/var is the right place for those files.

I disagree both with your premise and your conclusion. There's nothing
inherent with qmail that makes binaries and man pages host-specific.
The compiled-in-UID's are not an exception. Binaries in /var is simply
a bad idea. If they are indeed host specific they should be in /sbin.
However, for the majority of multi-host-installations out there the
UID's will be uniform, even on heterogeneous networks. I believe
qmail should encourage installations to do this, instead of discouraging
it.

--Dave
Re: FSSTD is linux specific? [ In reply to ]
Dave Barr:
> There's nothing inherent with qmail that makes binaries and man
> pages host-specific.

Why do you say this?

pre-compilation configuration of qmail affects both binaries and man
pages (which includes host-specific table lookups).

--
Raul