Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 3/23/84; site cbosgd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!we13!ihnp4!cbosgd!mark
From: mark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton)
Newsgroups: net.mail.headers
Subject: Re: "blaming Unix SendMail"
Message-ID: <1279@cbosgd.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Apr-84 20:23:25 EST
Article-I.D.: cbosgd.1279
Posted: Tue Apr 17 20:23:25 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Apr-84 19:07:39 EST
References: <474@hou3c.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus
Lines: 20


	     Tell me, why does SendMail need such complex configuration files?
	Wouldn't a preferable scheme be to look at ones environment at runtime
	and do the right thing by default?

This is a little like claiming your computer should "do the right thing
by default" when presented with a null program.  "The right thing" is
highly subjective, and probably depends on reading someones mind.  For
example, how should "a!b@c" be interpreted?  "(a!b)@c" as required by
the ARPANET?  "a!(b@c)" as required by existing UUCP software?  Someone
has to make a decision, and this decision must be implemented in the
sendmail config file.  In fact, "looking in ones environment" is done on
UNIX largely by reading a file.  Wouldn't such a file be called a config file?

Sure, sendmail configuration files are complex.  So is machine language.
It doesn't mean that you shouldn't have any machine language on your
machine.  It means you write a compiler from a high level language.

Sendmail's config files are very complex because they do so much.  What
should be done is for someone to write a simple compiler or interactive
front end that asks a few questions and generates the appropriate file.