On 9, Aug, 2001 at 02:06:28PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 12:02:47PM +0000, Jean-Christian Imbeault wrote:
> [snip]
> > >Are you sure there is nothing in /usr/sbin/sendmail?
> >
> > There is. Missed it. Should it be a symlink too?
On my OpenBSD CURRENT machine there's no /usr/bin/sendmail, only one in
/usr/sbin.
I don't think you have one in /usr/bin, surprise me! ;-)
> > So what is /usr/libexec/sendmail/sendmail?
>
> That is (at least on FreeBSD, so don't hate me if it's different on
> OpenBSD :) the actual sendmail binary. /usr/bin/sendmail and
> /usr/sbin/sendmail are just symlinks to mailwrapper, which then
> invokes /usr/libexec/sendmail/sendmail for you, or for example qmail's
> sendmail wrapper, if configured as such in /etc/mail/mailer.conf.
>
> mailwrapper is, however, unreliable, which is why you should just use
> symlinks.
This is news to me, I've been using mailwrapper (e.g. /etc/mailer.conf)
instead.
What's so bad about mailwrapper?
> --
> Against Free Sex! http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html
Yeah, free sex really hurts the economy and innovation.
Where can i *buy* a sex license? (I don't like stealing, you know).
:-)
Regards
Morten
--
×·.¸¸.·´¨) ¸.·´ ¸.·´¨) O Morten Liebach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(_¸.·´ (¸.·´ ¸.·× 0 http://home1.stofanet.dk/liebach/
(_¸.·´ o http://pc89225.stofanet.dk/
.
