From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakob Hirsch Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 11:55:18 +0000 Subject: Re: exim4 Message-Id: <42381EA6.3000208@plonk.de> 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 Morten K. Poulsen wrote: >>Sounds sensible, but mlmmj uses execvp, which uses PATH itself, so why should >>you have to parse that yourself? > It only uses $PATH if the given argument does not contain a slash. We might as > well use execl() instead of execlp(). I may patch that. Oh, I thought you used execlp() by intention. >>Another possibility would be to use a hard coded path from configure or some >>header file. > Configure it at build time? Yikes. Why not? Most poeple use make install and never move around any binaries. >>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. > Exactly! I want to use two different versions of mlmmj for the same list, when > testing a new patch. One set of binaries in one directory, the other set in > another directory, and two different aliases. Therefore I _need_ the full path, > and it can not be in the configuration file, as the two versions share it. You mean configuration of a particular mailing list? I agree that putting the binaries' path there is senseless. But what about using --program-suffix? I always thought that's the perfect way to have multiple versions of the same software on your system. Anyway, I think I will code myself a shell script to have something like a frontend to the usual functions (sub, unsub, list). That also saves me from entering the mlmmj spool directory every time :) Another possibility would be to use default values for these things (taken at configure time). Would you accept a patch for that?