From: david@csource.oz.au (david nugent) Subject: Re: linux mail Date: 2 May 1992 22:58:17 GMT
tony@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
> Did you have problems with the MAIL environment variable being set to
> /var/spool/mail/... rather than /usr/spool/mail/... I get this using bash &
> ash, think it must be set in the login stuff somewhere ??? ... hmmmm
I simply set it explicitly using /etc/profile, which I did when I first
noticed this long before I had a mail system installed.
i.e. (in "/etc/profile")
MAIL=/usr/spool/mail/$LOGNAME
.
.
export MAIL
> Do you have your /etc/passwd entries set to give the "real" name ? I set min
> to :& Kew, ... : but my username is not substituted for the &. I thought elm
> would do this ?
I used standard SYSV conventions and configured everything to use that.
Many programs have other methods of doing this including looking at
~/.fullname, a /usr/lib/fullnames database and a FULLNAME environment
variable, but I prefer getting it from /etc/passwd, even if it does
limit the amount of fun users tend to play. :-)
> ... I used the suggested lmail sh script from the uucp stuff
> the problem may be that. hmmm... perhapse I'm just showing my ignorance here
> :-( I also find I get the message header dilivered (minus subject field) & n
> message !
I didn't feel comfortable with a script either.
> I'm currently using ka9q to talk to the world via SLIP & can recieve smtp mai
> but with no sendmail I can't get mail out (ie I need something to take an elm
> message & sling the requisite stuff round it for ka9q to send) I've seen man
> requests for a sendmail port - has anyone done this ?
smail 3.1.25 works just fine for me and does this just fine. I haven't
yet done a lot of work with the ported uucp package yet (not after I found
that it falls over dismally at PEP speeds due to driver/kernel problems)
but it gets into the uucp queue just fine.
> The code (BSD) is real designed for use with an ethernet connection +
> sockets as far as I can tell, maybee I really need something else ?
Sendmail is pretty much transport independant. It is less intuitive to
configure and run than is smail, and although my experience with smail
3.1 is limited to working under Linux, I'm pretty impressed by it so
far and I haven't begun to explore the possibilities (yet).
..............................................................................
david nugent Public Access Usenet "Only Nixon could go to China"
david@csource.oz.au +61-3-792-3507 - old Vulcan proverb
3:632/400@fidonet, 58:4100/1@intlnet, 199:4242/5@rainbownet, 33:300/6@admin
PO Box 260, Endeavour Hills, Victoria, Australia, 3802.