On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 03:59:23PM +0000, Ste Jones wrote:
> On 1/12/07, Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >* Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-01-12 15:50]:
> >> On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 12:30:32PM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote:
> >> > * Lars Hansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-01-12 08:20]:
> >> > > On Friday 12 January 2007 13:04, noob lenoobie wrote:
> >> > > > My problem is the following : I'm unable to send mail from php.
> >> > >
> >> > > the php mail() function will not work in chroot (unless you install
> >the chroot
> >> > > flavour of the mini-sendmail package).
> >> >
> >> > err.. ...unless you make mail work inside the chroot.
> >> > and since mini_sendmail is a piece of shit, i recomment femail, but I
> >> > might be biased :)
> >>
> >> I'm curious - why do you feel mini_sendmail is 'a piece of shit'? I've
> >> never given much thought to it, but it has worked well for a couple of
> >> years now, and femail doesn't seem to do things very differently.
> >
> >well, it's a bit that I looked at mini_sendmail's code, but it was
> >horrid.
> >second, it does not nearly implement RFC282{1,2} correctly. the parser
> >is horribly incomplete and broken.
> >
> >> I'll have to admit that mini_sendmail's website sucks, but at least the
> >> man page doesn't misspell 'environment' (at least in the DESCRIPTION on
> >> http://unduli.bsws.de/femail/femail.8.html). ;-)
> >
> >oh well
> >
>
> Just out of interest does femail need a sh in the chroot like mini_sendmail?
>
yeah because the guy who wrote the mail() function in php thought it would be
easier to call popen() and save the command line parsing than parsing it then
calling an exec*() function.
--
veins @ { epitech } - futur ancien - ex-astek en metal
http://www.evilkittens.org
