From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 3 16:55:08 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 034FD1065670 for ; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 16:55:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amvandemore@gmail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f54.google.com (mail-fx0-f54.google.com [209.85.161.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83D828FC12 for ; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 16:55:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxe4 with SMTP id 4so3252264fxe.13 for ; Sat, 03 Sep 2011 09:55:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=0hKH3SgSjHO88/NH09YYHYdvGcMVC7BJNl2zUaSG7Xc=; b=uiowCqh4rYwKIfLo5z4Mqt/YCcTK4RRmIYuPJd1QbbRoqkpRRtdtxbiZc0PzTL9Oky tRNKwtvJaX/iQ6L4wYvZzsyy75m4No7KPxrGhRBZUMlkNMIsgRRmcV9R0NvXVElJeDIH rB13MTZ65xA382r+HyWtPpv2+4SrFOZrRYfkw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.39.216 with SMTP id h24mr2515878fae.31.1315068906240; Sat, 03 Sep 2011 09:55:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.120.72 with HTTP; Sat, 3 Sep 2011 09:55:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201109031639.KAA25689@lariat.net> References: <201109031639.KAA25689@lariat.net> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 11:55:06 -0500 Message-ID: From: Adam Vande More To: Brett Glass Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "at" command and mail X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011 16:55:08 -0000 On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Brett Glass wrote: > I'm setting up a FreeBSD appliance that won't be running a mail daemon. I'd > like the at(8) command to be there for scheduling of commands, but do not > see any way to prevent it from trying to send mail after it executes a > command. (There's not even a command line option that says "do not mail," or > at least I can't find one.) Am I missing something, or does at(8) always > expect to be able to send mail? If so, would it be worth implementing an > atrun.conf configuration file that makes it optional and possibly sets other > defaults for at(8)? > If you redirect the output from the command to /dev/null or other file, you shouldn't recieve an email unless you've also specified -m. -- Adam Vande More