Bug 35371
| Summary: | /etc/rc virecover script starts sendmail even if sendmail should be off | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Base System | Reporter: | Michael Wardle <michael> |
| Component: | conf | Assignee: | freebsd-bugs (Nobody) <bugs> |
| Status: | Closed FIXED | ||
| Severity: | Affects Only Me | ||
| Priority: | Normal | ||
| Version: | Unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | Any | ||
| OS: | Any | ||
On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 01:23:03AM -0800, Michael Wardle wrote:
> On boot, sendmail is started by the virecover script in /etc/rc, even if sendmail is configured off.
This is the only reference to sendmail in /etc/rc :
# Delete any recovery files that are zero length,
# corrupted, or that have no corresponding backup file.
# Else send mail to the user.
recfile=`awk '/^X-vi-recover-path:/{print $2}' < "${i}"`
if [ -n "${recfile}" -a -s "${recfile}" ]; then
sendmail -t < "${i}"
else
rm -f "${i}"
fi
It's sending mail, which is not quite the same as starting sendmail.
Or do you mean something else ?
Ceri
On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 02:20:02AM -0800, Ceri wrote: > This is the only reference to sendmail in /etc/rc : Whoops, I mean w.r.t. vi.recover, of course.. Ceri To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message State Changed From-To: open->closed As Ceri points out, the code in question is not starting sendmail(8) as a daemon. 1) shouldn't we test to see if sendmail is installed before calling it?
2) shouldn't it be possible to disable calling "sendmail" (particularly
if ${sendmail_enable} is NO)?
3) is there any reason why we shouldn't call "mail" instead of
"sendmail"? (admittedly, i don't know too much about these
utilities,
but I thought it would be preferred to invoke a MUA rather than an
MTA if all we wanted to do was send a message)
4) if we're going to call an MTA rather than an MUA, shouldn't we at
least test whether it's already running
(i don't think it's correct to invoke what seems to be a system
utility (usually invoked as a daemon) from a shell script in this
way -- i could be wrong)
5) shouldn't we call whatever MTA the user has configured (e.g.
sendmail, postfix, exim, qmail)?
I'd really like to be able to disable the behavior I mentioned in the
original report.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Greetings - Send FREE e-cards for every occasion!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
Oof; let GNATS know about this, too.. ----- Forwarded message from Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net> ----- Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 12:56:31 +0200 From: Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net> To: Michael Wardle <michael@endbracket.net> Cc: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: conf/35371: /etc/rc virecover script starts sendmail even if sendmail should be off Mail-Followup-To: Michael Wardle <michael@endbracket.net>, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200202281020.g1SAK2R65822@freefall.freebsd.org>; from michael@endbracket.net on Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 02:20:02AM -0800 On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 02:20:02AM -0800, Michael Wardle wrote: > The following reply was made to PR conf/35371; it has been noted by GNATS. > > From: Michael Wardle <michael@endbracket.net> > To: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org > Cc: > Subject: Re: conf/35371: /etc/rc virecover script starts sendmail even if sendmail should be off > Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 02:18:51 -0800 (PST) > > 1) shouldn't we test to see if sendmail is installed before calling it? /usr/sbin/sendmail is simply a symlink to mailwrapper(8); see below. > 2) shouldn't it be possible to disable calling "sendmail" (particularly > if ${sendmail_enable} is NO)? Yes, edit your mailer.conf to run e.g. /bin/true when /usr/sbin/sendmail is invoked :) > 3) is there any reason why we shouldn't call "mail" instead of > "sendmail"? (admittedly, i don't know too much about these > utilities, > but I thought it would be preferred to invoke a MUA rather than an > MTA if all we wanted to do was send a message) With the arguments it is invoked, sendmail would actually function as a MUA; any sendmail wrappers installed by ports (e.g. qmail's /var/qmail/bin/sendmail) would recognize that and act appropriately. > 4) if we're going to call an MTA rather than an MUA, shouldn't we at > least test whether it's already running > (i don't think it's correct to invoke what seems to be a system > utility (usually invoked as a daemon) from a shell script in this > way -- i could be wrong) We are not running it as an MTA; we are only calling it as a MUA, all it is supposed to do is (somehow) queue a message for delivery by the actual system MTA. > 5) shouldn't we call whatever MTA the user has configured (e.g. > sendmail, postfix, exim, qmail)? Invoking /usr/sbin/sendmail actually invokes mailwrapper(8) under the name of 'sendmail'; that is, it is exactly what you want - invoking whatever MTA the user has chosen to install. I suspect that a large part of the confusion here is caused by the fact that sendmail may function as an MTA, MUA or even simply an MSA, depending on its command-line arguments. G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev roam@ringlet.net roam@FreeBSD.org PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 I am not the subject of this sentence. ----- End forwarded message ----- |
I installed FreeBSD on a low-end machine to make it essentially a terminal, and decided to turn off network services including sendmail. On boot, sendmail is started by the virecover script in /etc/rc, even if sendmail is configured off. Fix: The way I worked around it was to check the value of ${sendmail_enable}. It would also be possible to check whether sendmail is running or see if there's a sendmail pid or lock file (but it doesn't seem to put one in /var/run). I'll attach a patch when I find a form that lets me upload files. How-To-Repeat: Turn off sendmail in /etc/rc.conf (sendmail_enable="NO"), reboot. It's probably also necessary to have a crashed vi session.