site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev@lists.apple.com In message <479C43B1.3000400@yahoo.com>, Steve writes:
This was not to be a debate on what is the best MTA. I respectfully disagree on all counts. Postfix will not do half of the things we use qmail for. But no matter, not the point. I've used and managed both. The question is about execv.
At least one count is the claim that qmail is unmaintained. I would be shocked if this were not still true.
I disagree, your test is not the same.
What distinction do you think matters? I have chdir'd to a directory and called execv with a non-absolute path.
Recall, qmail is the second most deployed MTA ,and, the code works on all platforms, including Tiger as is.
I am aware of a number of patches that are being distributed to make the code even compile on some platforms.
The code appears correct.
Like much djb code, it appears correct, but it is gratuitously clever.
The extra code shows it to be in the right directory, as it does when rec-compiled on our Tiger servers. So, my conclusion is different. Anyone else? Can we stick to the topic?
Be less prickly. I performed a trivial test of the exact scenario described -- chdir to a directory, call execv with a non-absolute path. It worked. This suggests that execv is certainly capable of working with non-absolute paths. I can't prove that it will work with every possible non-absolute path, from every possible directory, but it seems clear that it is working with at least one non-absolute path, from at least one directory. -s _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.appl... This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com