From owner-freebsd-ports Thu Sep 20 11:24:11 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from lists.unixathome.org (lists.unixathome.org [210.48.103.158]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D883A37B40A; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 11:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wocker (lists.unixathome.org [210.48.103.158]) by lists.unixathome.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f8KINtj42015; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 06:23:57 +1200 (NZST) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) From: "Dan Langille" Organization: novice in training To: ports@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 14:23:48 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: qpopper and /etc/ftpusers Reply-To: dan@langille.org Cc: lioux@freebsd.org Message-ID: <3BA9FBF4.13773.89DF47D@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v4.0, beta 40) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I don't see how POP is connected to ftp users? This from mail/qpopper/Makefile: CONFIGURE_ARGS= --enable-apop=${PREFIX}/etc/qpopper/pop.auth \ --enable-nonauth-file=/etc/ftpusers \ --with-apopuid=pop --without-gdbm \ --enable-keep-temp-drop Does it make sense to do things that way? If an auth file is to be used at all, why not use one with an appropriate name (e.g. /etc/popusers). The current setup breaks POLA. -- Dan Langille - DVL Software Limited The FreeBSD Diary - http://freebsddiary.org/ - practical examples To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message