Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:33:33 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <cygwin@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: fetchmail/procmail/jed -- cygwin binaries available?
Message-ID: <20010316093333.D19468@cygbert.vinschen.de>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
References: <20010314152310.A71253@mandy.rockingd.calgary.ab.ca> <20010315111917D.rsato@ccs.co.jp> <20010315125009.B12630@cygbert.vinschen.de> <20010316105225S.rsato@ccs.co.jp>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <20010316105225S.rsato@ccs.co.jp>; from rsato@ccs.co.jp on Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 10:52:25AM +0900

On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 10:52:25AM +0900, Rue. SATOH wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen:
> > Did it build OOTB or did you patch it somehow?
> > 
> > That sounds interesting. Together with ssmtp and fetchmail with -mda
> > option we would have a full mailing system.
> 
> I'll send a patch for maildrop to cygwin@cygwin.com.
> But this patch is *dirty*.
> 
> Maildrop use 'setuid()' like functions for delivery to other user expect
> one who launched maildrop. I cannot resolve this problem.
> Corinna, can you solve this problem?

Probably but I have definitely not the time to do this right now.

In theory that should be no problem. As a first hack simply
uncomment these calls or ignore the return value. If maildrop
uses strict chmod settings, open them up. If maildrop then works
without complaining we could care to rearranging security again.
I have written a function for OpenSSH which checks if security
makes sense, dependent of the used file system and if ntea/ntsec
are on or off. We could recycle that functionality as desired.

However, I saw in your patch that you have used `#ifndef __CYGWIN__'
in the setprocgroup function. Why didn't you simply undef the
HAS_SETPGRP and HAS_SETPGID defines in config.h resp. unset them
explicitely in configure.in when building for a cygwin target?
This is way cleaner.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

