Re: Mutt Next Generation
On 2005-01-27 15:53:13 -0500, John Franklin wrote:
>> simple tool. Unix systems have one well defined security
>> boundary: the process; glueing everything into libraries
>> circumvents this.
> What do you secure by calling a separate binary to deliver the
> mail? What's being protected? Do you think libesmtp is going to
> pollute mutt's data space in some way that ssmtp would prevent?
Simple: That way, you get the same functionality without additional
code in mutt. Less code is better.
> I would argue that libraries are as good a module as programs.
> Programs have the advantage of using a shell and pipe to string
> together multiple tools to achieve a result. Here, a shared
> library is quite sufficient.
There's an established interface for connecting MTAs to MUAs.
/usr/{sbin,lib}/sendmail. We implement that.
You are asking for another interface to be added, instead of
re-using the established interface.
(I've been an SMTP AUTH user for years, first with postfix, now with
exim on my client. The latter because I have to send different kinds
of mails through different servers because of SPF.)
Regards,
--
Thomas Roessler · Personal soap box at <http://log.does-not-exist.org/>.