Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:33:33 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: fetchmail/procmail/jed -- cygwin binaries available?
Message-ID: <20010316093333.D19468@cygbert.vinschen.de>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20010314152310 DOT A71253 AT mandy DOT rockingd DOT calgary DOT ab DOT ca> <20010315111917D DOT rsato AT ccs DOT co DOT jp> <20010315125009 DOT B12630 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <20010316105225S DOT rsato AT ccs DOT co DOT 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 AT cygwin DOT 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 AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.

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