On Thursday, Aug 7, 2003, at 02:51 America/Denver, Peter Mathiasson
wrote:
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:34:28PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Here it isn't. That is because that correspondence is done on
company
time using company equipment supposedly for company purposes. They
have the
right to
* Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030806 21:40]:
> Erm, configuring an SMTP server for a mail client is not an admin level
> thing. I mean, c'mon, fetchmail can be run as the user and the same user can
> configure a pop server there. *shrug*
I wonder when people will start telling configurin
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:34:28PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 07:27:01 +0200
> Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't know the laws where you come from, but in .no, I think this
> > would be very illegal. Also, you don't want to archive everything
> > that passe
Mark Ferlatte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> I'm not sure why ssmtp has TLS disabled by default; perhaps a bug should be
> filed? It seems like it would provide all of the needed outgoing MTA
> functionality without requiring a daemon.
Copyright? At least the version in woody is straightforwa
On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 07:27:01 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't know the laws where you come from, but in .no, I think this
> would be very illegal. Also, you don't want to archive everything
> that passes through a mail server, that'll just give you a huge bunch
> of unorg
* Steve Lamb
| On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 18:50:21 +0200
| Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > Why do you want to do that?
|
| Imagine being at work, polling mail from home and then wanting
| to send mail back out. If the computer, say the laptop, is
| configured to forward to work mai
Joe Wreschnig said on Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 06:32:14PM -0500:
> On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 18:04, Mark Ferlatte wrote:
> > I'm not sure why ssmtp has TLS disabled by default; perhaps a bug should be
> > filed? It seems like it would provide all of the needed outgoing MTA
> > functionality without requir
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:25:25PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
> I demand that Eduard Bloch may or may not have written...
> > PS: a hot day or what?
>
> If you call 20?C hot, then yes, it has been a hot day ;-)
God, is that all? I've been sweating in 33C in a supposedly
air-conditioned office. *si
On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 18:04, Mark Ferlatte wrote:
> I'm not sure why ssmtp has TLS disabled by default; perhaps a bug should be
> filed? It seems like it would provide all of the needed outgoing MTA
> functionality without requiring a daemon.
Looking at the SSMTP bug page, the package seems to be
Joe Wreschnig said on Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 05:43:49PM -0500:
> Interesting. I'm running unstable, but I can't find instructions on
> enabling TLS anywhere (nor does SSMTP seem to link to any TLS
> libraries). I see mention of it in the README (specifically, only a
> credit for it), but not the manu
On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 17:09, Mark Ferlatte wrote:
> ssmtp in unstable supports TLS and certificate based AUTH (so you can
> authenticate on a per machine basis for relay). It appears to have AUTH
> CRAM-MD5 support, but it's unclear if that's distributable (according to
> comments in the source).
Joe Wreschnig said on Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 04:39:10PM -0500:
> > And is a much better choice than expecting every user to locally
> > configure smtp settings in the MUA. Lack of direct-SMTP support in mutt
> > is a good thing.
>
> SSMTP is not acceptable for those of us that use SMTP AUTH+TLS, un
On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 09:27, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 06:51:12PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 09:35:29AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > > IMHO using any local mailer is a bad idea on a desktop system. You send
> > > off the mail, your MUA says "Sent
* Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I demand that Eduard Bloch may or may not have written...
>
> [snip]
> > PS: a hot day or what?
>
> If you call 20°C hot, then yes, it has been a hot day ;-)
Here in germany were up to 39 °C today.
I demand that Emile van Bergen may or may not have written...
[snip]
> I would not consider anything that contains a SMTP client an MTA.
You realise that by that definition, exim isn't an MTA :-)
> A proxy that handles port 25 is no MTA either. Such strict definitions
> ('talks SMTP') are genera
I demand that Eduard Bloch may or may not have written...
[snip]
> PS: a hot day or what?
If you call 20°C hot, then yes, it has been a hot day ;-)
--
| Darren Salt | nr. Ashington, | linux (or ds) at
| woody, sarge, | Northumberland | youmustbejoking
| RISC OS | Toon Army | demon
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:00:38 -0500
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry, that's the admin's job to configure. If the user and the
> admin are one and the same, why does it matter if the configuration is
> done in a local or a global config file? (sudo dpkg-reconfigure ...)
> And if th
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:04:00AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 09:27:10 -0500
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > And is a much better choice than expecting every user to locally
> > configure smtp settings in the MUA. Lack of direct-SMTP support in mutt
> > is a good
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 12:13:41 -0600
Hans Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would alter the way my mail is sent.
Are you sure? I see nothing in the patch that would require the use of
SMTP. The verbage always says "allow". I do not see the code for using the
local MTA removed at all.
--
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:27:38AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 18:50:21 +0200
> Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Steve Lamb
> > | How many local users are you going to have on a laptop whose correct
> > SMTP| server changes as a function of their location?
>
* Steve Lamb [Wed, 6 Aug 2003 at 10:19 -0700]
> > New mutt users might be slightly confused by the mutt way of doing
> > things but that doesn't mean we have to patch mutt for their sakes.
> > Naturally, it's up to the package maintainer how to differ from
> > upstream, but this mutt user would be
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 18:50:21 +0200
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Steve Lamb
> | How many local users are you going to have on a laptop whose correct
> SMTP| server changes as a function of their location?
> Usually: one, I guess.
So 1 person, 1 location to change.
> |
Morgon Kanter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I agree. The main functionality of Mutt is to read *and* send mail.
>> Being able to only read mail archives is not the main functionality
>> but a backup functionality. To be able
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:48:29 -0600
Hans Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> New mutt users might be slightly confused by the mutt way of doing
> things but that doesn't mean we have to patch mutt for their sakes.
> Naturally, it's up to the package maintainer how to differ from
> upstream, but this
#include
* Steve Langasek [Wed, Aug 06 2003, 10:10:06AM]:
> You tell me. Why is it so important to *prevent* the installation of an
> MTA on such a machine when installing mutt?
>
> 99% of our users are going to want to send outgoing mail from their
> mailreader. A package that contains multip
* Steve Lamb
| How many local users are you going to have on a laptop whose correct SMTP
| server changes as a function of their location?
Usually: one, I guess.
| Oddly enough I only have one program for that now. Sylpheed-Claws.
| Fortunately it can do something that most SMTP serve
I don't pretend to know what is best for all users, but as a fairly
ordinary mutt user I can tell you that I would be unhappy to find out
that Debian patched mutt to do SMTP just so they could have a warm fuzzy
feeling about the depends. I like mutt the way it is: no SMTP.
New mutt users might be
Eduard Bloch wrote:
> It is allowing _few_ users to work around a dependency
> which makes sence for everybody else, but is not really useful for
> _those_ few users in their special environment.
What few users?
What special environment?
Can anyone provide a real world example of a
* Emile van Bergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030806 17:04]:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 03:03:07PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > * Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030806 13:43]:
> > > On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:10:03 +0200
> > > "Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > If mutt spoke SMTP, it
> Joe Average User would most probably be pissed if he installed mutt but
> doesn't have an MTA and then tries to send mail. That would take us back
> into the old days of Slackware.
Joe Average User has to follow the recommendation, since he
doesn't know the details. If he decides to do things d
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 04:36:36PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Bernhard R. Link [Wed, Aug 06 2003, 03:03:07PM]:
> > * Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030806 13:43]:
> > > On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:10:03 +0200
> > > "Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > If mutt spoke
I do not need CCs. I am obviously active on the list.
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 23:28:52 +0800
Cameron Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:04:00AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> It is if they have to dig up what the correct SMTP server is. Or if
> they're on a laptop whose "
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:04:00AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
| > And is a much better choice than expecting every user to locally
| > configure smtp settings in the MUA. Lack of direct-SMTP support in mutt
| > is a good thing.
|
| Yeah because entering "smtp.isp.com" is just so trying for mos
On 06-Aug-03, 09:18 (CDT), Jesus Climent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:01:51AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> >
> > Depends: ssmtp | mail-transport-agent
> >
> > That way, if you don't have an MTA already, it will select a simple "get
> > mail to a real MTA" package, w
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Steve Langasek [Wed, Aug 06 2003, 07:37:16AM]:
> > On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:52:37AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > > #include
> > > * Colin Watson [Wed, Aug 06 2003, 08:36:25AM]:
> >
> > > > > Why not appease both? Le
#include
* Bernhard R. Link [Wed, Aug 06 2003, 03:03:07PM]:
> * Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030806 13:43]:
> > On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:10:03 +0200
> > "Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > If mutt spoke SMTP, it would be a MTA itself. (Perhaps still missing
> > > the proper interfa
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 09:27:10 -0500
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And is a much better choice than expecting every user to locally
> configure smtp settings in the MUA. Lack of direct-SMTP support in mutt
> is a good thing.
Yeah because entering "smtp.isp.com" is just so trying fo
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 03:03:07PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030806 13:43]:
> > On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:10:03 +0200
> > "Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > If mutt spoke SMTP, it would be a MTA itself. (Perhaps still missing
> > > the pro
#include
* Steve Langasek [Wed, Aug 06 2003, 07:37:16AM]:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:52:37AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > #include
> > * Colin Watson [Wed, Aug 06 2003, 08:36:25AM]:
>
> > > > Why not appease both? Let mutt depend on
> > > > mail-transport-agent | no-user-mta
> > > >
> > >
#include
* Steve Greenland [Wed, Aug 06 2003, 08:01:51AM]:
> > Why not appease both? Let mutt depend on
> > mail-transport-agent | no-user-mta
>
> Or better,
>
> Depends: ssmtp | mail-transport-agent
Where is the point? OP did already know how to manage dependencies, he
can install ssmtp if h
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 06:51:12PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 09:35:29AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > IMHO using any local mailer is a bad idea on a desktop system. You send
> > off the mail, your MUA says "Sent", you power down or just close the
> > laptop, and, if you
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:01:51AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
>
> Depends: ssmtp | mail-transport-agent
>
> That way, if you don't have an MTA already, it will select a simple "get
> mail to a real MTA" package, whose configuration will ask "where's your
> real MTA?"
Doesn't policy state that
On 06-Aug-03, 02:06 (CDT), Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not appease both? Let mutt depend on
> mail-transport-agent | no-user-mta
Or better,
Depends: ssmtp | mail-transport-agent
That way, if you don't have an MTA already, it will select a simple "get
mail to a real MTA" pack
* Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030806 13:43]:
> On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:10:03 +0200
> "Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If mutt spoke SMTP, it would be a MTA itself. (Perhaps still missing
> > the proper interface to link /usr/lib/sendmail to mutt, but that would
> > be the lesser
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 10:52:37AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Colin Watson [Wed, Aug 06 2003, 08:36:25AM]:
> > > Why not appease both? Let mutt depend on
> > > mail-transport-agent | no-user-mta
> > >
> > > and tell such MTA hating users to create a fake "no-user-mta" package
> >
On Aug 05, "Artur R. Czechowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am not convinced to only Recommend on mail-transfer-agent. I rather
>tend to closing this wishitem or tag it as wontfix.
I'm inclined to close this bug. I agree with the submitter that a local
MTA is not strictly needed to use mutt,
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 13:10:03 +0200
"Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If mutt spoke SMTP, it would be a MTA itself. (Perhaps still missing
> the proper interface to link /usr/lib/sendmail to mutt, but that would
> be the lesser part).
No, it would not. It would be using another me
* Morgon Kanter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030806 07:57]:
> > I agree. The main functionality of Mutt is to read *and* send mail.
> > Being able to only read mail archives is not the main functionality
> > but a backup functionality. To be able to provide the main
> > functionality, an MTA is required,
Re: Re: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent? [Martin Schulze <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>, Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 07:26:33AM +0200, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> Joe Average User would most probably be pissed if he installed mutt
> but doesn't have an MTA and then tries to send
Hi, Colin Watson wrote:
> There's no point; it's just as easy to create a fake package that
> provides mail-transport-agent with equivs.
I wouldn't even think about that; it's too easy to forget all about that
and then get bitten when you install a package which does require a
working /usr/sbin/s
#include
* Colin Watson [Wed, Aug 06 2003, 08:36:25AM]:
> > Why not appease both? Let mutt depend on
> > mail-transport-agent | no-user-mta
> >
> > and tell such MTA hating users to create a fake "no-user-mta" package
> > with equivs.
>
> There's no point; it's just as easy to create a fake pa
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 09:35:29AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> IMHO using any local mailer is a bad idea on a desktop system. You send
> off the mail, your MUA says "Sent", you power down or just close the
> laptop, and, if your smarthost happens to be a bit slow today, the mail
> sits there i
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 09:35:29 +0200
Matthias Urlichs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IMHO using any local mailer is a bad idea on a desktop system. You send
> off the mail, your MUA says "Sent", you power down or just close the
> laptop, and, if your smarthost happens to be a bit slow today, the mail
>
* Andreas Metzler
| [1] I won't list Gnus but would be really surprised if it _needed_
| /usr/sbin/sendmail ;-)
gnus uses /usr/sbin/sendmail by default, but can use smtpmail.el if
you want that.
--
Tollef Fog Heen,''`.
UNIX is user friend
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 09:06:08AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> > I agree. The main functionality of Mutt is to read *and* send mail.
>
> AOL
>
> > Being able to only read mail archives is not the main functionality
> > but a backup functionality. To be able to provide the main
> >
Hi, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * Morgon Kanter
>
> | What if the MTA is on a different host? Can't mutt speak SMTP?
>
> Not without a patch, which afaik, isn't in the mutt in Debian.
I would recommend using that patch, then.
IMHO using any local mailer is a bad idea on a desktop system. You send
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 08:33:35PM -0700, Erik Steffl wrote:
| >Mutt can read mail without an MTA, but cannot send mail without one.
|
| it does not have to be on the same machine
It does in the specific case of mutt. I seem to recall Mutt's
developers deciding to specifically /not/ support S
#include
> I agree. The main functionality of Mutt is to read *and* send mail.
AOL
> Being able to only read mail archives is not the main functionality
> but a backup functionality. To be able to provide the main
> functionality, an MTA is required, hence a dependency.
Why not appease both?
* Morgon Kanter
| This one time, at band camp, Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > I agree. The main functionality of Mutt is to read *and* send mail.
| > Being able to only read mail archives is not the main functionality
| > but a backup functionality. To be able to provide the main
This one time, at band camp, Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree. The main functionality of Mutt is to read *and* send mail.
> Being able to only read mail archives is not the main functionality
> but a backup functionality. To be able to provide the main
> functionality, an MTA i
Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> I've found your bugreport:
> http://bugs.debian.org/202869
>
> I see no issue to not depending mutt on mail-transfer-agent.
>
> Mutt as is, is a software for reading, writing and sending emails.
> And to provide a full functionality it needs a kind of transfer-agent.
Hans Fugal wrote:
* Andreas Jellinghaus [Wed, 6 Aug 2003 at 00:27 +0200]
mutt can do many nice things without /usr/sbin/sendmail.
a dependency is set if something is always required,
a recommends if is required for the common use, and
a suggestion is used if it improved the functionality.
so depen
Hi,
[ note that I atm have the tendency to say that the Depends should
remain... ]
Hans Fugal wrote:
> * Andreas Jellinghaus [Wed, 6 Aug 2003 at 00:27 +0200]
> > mutt can do many nice things without /usr/sbin/sendmail.
> > a dependency is set if something is always required,
> > a recommends i
* Andreas Jellinghaus [Wed, 6 Aug 2003 at 00:27 +0200]
> mutt can do many nice things without /usr/sbin/sendmail.
> a dependency is set if something is always required,
> a recommends if is required for the common use, and
> a suggestion is used if it improved the functionality.
> so depending on
> I can imagine a workstation without those packages but it is, IMO,
> mutilated box.
please keep your opinion outside the control file.
cron, at & friends __need__ an MTA (or to be exact:
a /usr/sbin/sendmail app), they will not work without.
mutt can do many nice things without /usr/sbin/sendma
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 21:42:43 +0200
"Artur R. Czechowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to know Md's opinion, but for me there are no reasons to relax
> dependencies for mutt (and other MUA). I would not like to do it without
> policy requirements because it concerns also other MUA's.
Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 07:21:00PM +0200, Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
>> OTOH this case concerns not only mutt but also other MUA's. Feel free
>> to discuss it on debian-devel mailing list or propose a changes
>> to Debian Packaging Policy. I will leave t
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 08:00:03PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> There are enough SMTP/POP3 MUAs which do not need any MTA infrastructure on
> the local host, whatsoever. Mutt can fetch by pop-3, but I think it has no
> smtp support build in, or?
I just (actually few hours ago) find patch which
Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 08:00:03PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
There are enough SMTP/POP3 MUAs which do not need any MTA infrastructure on
the local host, whatsoever.
But there are some important packages which depends on MTA directly, like:
at, cron, debconf, logrotate
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 08:00:03PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> There are enough SMTP/POP3 MUAs which do not need any MTA infrastructure on
> the local host, whatsoever.
But there are some important packages which depends on MTA directly, like:
at, cron, debconf, logrotate, mailx.
I can imagine
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 07:21:00PM +0200, Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> OTOH this case concerns not only mutt but also other MUA's. Feel free
> to discuss it on debian-devel mailing list or propose a changes
> to Debian Packaging Policy. I will leave this wishitem open until
> an agreement is reache
Artur R. Czechowski dijo [Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 07:21:00PM +0200]:
> Hello
>
> I've found your bugreport:
> http://bugs.debian.org/202869
>
> I see no issue to not depending mutt on mail-transfer-agent.
>
> Mutt as is, is a software for reading, writing and sending emails.
> And to provide a full
Hello
I've found your bugreport:
http://bugs.debian.org/202869
I see no issue to not depending mutt on mail-transfer-agent.
Mutt as is, is a software for reading, writing and sending emails.
And to provide a full functionality it needs a kind of transfer-agent.
I am not convinced to only Recomm
73 matches
Mail list logo
