Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ateng!chip From: chip@ateng.ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix Subject: Re: Xenix mail system Keywords: xenix, mail Message-ID: <1989Jan23.124328.11334@ateng.ateng.com> Date: 23 Jan 89 17:43:27 GMT References: <417@ispi.UUCP> <295@tessera.UUCP> Organization: A T Engineering, Tampa, FL Lines: 22 According to jtc@tessera.UUCP (J.T. Conklin): >This is a brief history of my mail system. >1. Replaced execmail with sendmail. >2. Used smail as a back end to sendmail. >3. Totally removed SCO mail. > > [ Bug waiting to happen department: What is bound to happen sooner > or later when two Xenix machines on a network share the /usr/spool/mail > directory when they don't also share /tmp? ] The "deliver" program can be configured to use *both* Xenix and Unix locking schemes. This provides maximal safety in networked environments. > The ELM configuration script discovered I was on a Xenix box > and blindly assumed I was using that standard Xenix methodology. > It didn't even ask for confirmation! If you have a non-standard system, you have to expect such problems. -- Chip Salzenberg or A T Engineering Me? Speak for my company? Surely you jest! "It's no good. They're tapping the lines."