Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uunet!tiamat!bahamut!jim
From: jim@bahamut.fsc.com (James O'Connor)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: smail on Xenix 2.3.2
Message-ID: <253@bahamut.fsc.com>
Date: 26 Nov 89 15:41:18 GMT
References: <4043@questar.QUESTAR.MN.ORG> <1122@vector.Dallas.TX.US>
Organization: Filtration Sciences - Chattanooga,TN
Lines: 27

In article <1122@vector.Dallas.TX.US>, chip@vector.Dallas.TX.US (Chip Rosenthal) writes:
>     are some patches in the comp.sources.misc archives which make smail
>     work with xenix and include the fake execmail.  Be careful, there are
>     several revs in the archives.  Get the latest.

Or you could write to chip@ateng.com to get the latest version, since he
is the author.

> 2)  My preference is to patch smail that it may be installed as
>     /usr/lib/mail/execmail.  You can then throw execmail in the crapper
>     with the smail installation instructions. :-)  However, with this
>     approach you lose Micnet support (yawn).  I'd be glad to send out a
>     copy of this patch.

You don't necessarily loose Micnet support by replacing execmail.  The
basic scheme of smail2.5 is that you have either local mail (delivered
by the command specified by the LMAIL macro) or remote mail (delivered
by the command specified by the RMAIL macro).  If you want to replace execmail
with smail2.5, or have mail addressed like user@machine or machine!user
delivered via smail2.5 over micnet connections, then you can use a program
in the RMAIL macro that figures out, according to the host name, whether
to use Micnet, uucp, or whatever, to deliver the mail.  If anyone's
interested, I have a quick little hack which does this.
------------- 
James B. O'Connor			Work:	jim@tiamat.fsc.com
Filtration Sciences --			Play:   jim@bahamut.fsc.com
A division of Ahlstrom			UUCP:	uunet!tiamat!jim