From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mads Martin Joergensen Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:55:00 +0000 Subject: Re: exim4 Message-Id: <20050314085459.GA19605@mmj.dk> List-Id: References: <4232593D.2000404@plonk.de> In-Reply-To: <4232593D.2000404@plonk.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: mlmmj@mlmmj.org * Jakob Hirsch [Mar 14. 2005 00:55]: > Mads Martin Joergensen wrote: > > >>I've wondered about that myself. If the binaries are installed somewhere > >>in $PATH, wouldn't that provide sufficient method for finding them? > >I would prefer for security reasons not to start parsing environment > >variables. > > Sounds sensible, but mlmmj uses execvp, which uses PATH itself, so why > should you have to parse that yourself? This assumes that mlmmj is installed in the PATH, which very often is not the case. mlmmj binaries are run by some unpriviliged user, which often doesn't have a path. That would lead to execlp searching in /bin and /usr/bin for binaries, but all the BSDs for one have it installed in /usr/local/bin. > Another possibility would be to use a hard coded path from configure or > some header file. > > > Besides, with this method, you can have many mlmmj installations in > > parallel. > > mlmmj uses no config file, so what's the use? Having different versions > of mlmmj running? That should be done with configure's --program-suffix. > Otherwise you end up having a directory for every mlmmj installation. But then you couldn't move the binaries around, and it would add constraints. If it's so bad for you, just create a small shell wrapper which solves it all for you? The use for several installations is needed for people running production systems. -- Mads Martin Joergensen, http://mmj.dk "Why make things difficult, when it is possible to make them cryptic and totally illogical, with just a little bit more effort?" -- A. P. J.