>>>> "MB" == Martin Buchholz
<martin(a)xemacs.org> writes:
MB> The `gnuserv' executable is tightly bound to the XEmacs it works with,
MB> so gnuserv should be executed directly from `exec-directory', without
MB> using PATH.
agree.
MB> `movemail' in `exec-directory', on the other hand, is less likely to
MB> be an improvement on the movemail earlier in the PATH. In particular,
MB> it is less likely to be properly setgid. So movemail should be
MB> exec'ed using PATH.
I still don't agree on this.
Just a general question. How many programs use movemail? The only ones I
know of are netscape, emacs & xemacs.
netscape does not install it sgid at all, at least not on my linux box.
Everytime i upgrade I get reamed up the wazoo by the new movemail. Yes,
this is what's motivates me to say the current situation with exec-path is
backwards.
Emacs & XEmacs provide an installation target "make do-blessmail" that
will test and properly sgid movemail on installation. I consider this a
better situation.
Both Emacs & XEmacs put movemail in a architecture-dependent dir, ala
$prefix/something/something/something/386-redhat-linux. Of course, they
do the same thing, put this dir at the end of exec-path.
I don't know, I doubt I will win the argument. I can fix it easily enough
on my own system, though it's a (to me) needless pain in the rear. I will
just continue to cordially disagree.
jeff