Re: [gentoo-user] PORTAGE_ELOG error

[Neil Bothwick]

On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 14:27:22 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:

> >> Sending mail with directly speaking SMTP isn't. That's the job
> >> of a MTA.
> >
> > What if you don't have an MTA installed, which is how this question
> > arose?
>
> Then you install one.

That's not an acceptable answer for a core system service. Portage
should, and can, be able to do its job using the standard Python mail
transport methods. 

> > Talking SMTP is how all my mail-sending software communicates with
> > it.
>
> cron?

Fair comment, I forgot about that one, which uses ssmtp. In my defence,
our month-old grandson stayed with us last night - sleep-deprivation is a
b*******!

> >> > Why not let portage work with the same SMTP server you use for all
> >> > other mail?
> >>
> >> Why make me configure SMTP in two places (MTA and Portage)?
> >
> > That's a separate question.
>
> No, it's not.

It is, but it doesn't matter.You should not be "made" to configure mail
in two places if you have an MTA, I never disagreed with that. But
equally, you should not be forced to install an MTA.

> > It's trivial to configure portage to use a
> > local MTA if you have one.
>
> No, it's not *trivial*. It's not hard, but trivial... No.

Uncommenting the relevant line and changing the email address to your own
seems trivial to me. It may not be trivial to a SUSE user, but no Gentoo
user should have trouble entering their mail address in a config file.

> > If you want to use sendmail instead, why not
> > submit a bug report, preferably with a patch?
>
> PORTAGE_ELOG_COMMAND exists. I'd rather suggest to dump the
> wasteful SMTP support. But I doubt that such a good suggestion
> would be welcome - rather the Windows is chosen.

It's not wasteful, as it provides an easy option for many people and it
uses existing software. Look at the code and you'll see that all it does
is parse the address etc. from the config file and use it to send the
message via an smtplib function. Using sendmail would require about the
same amount of code, giving a choice of the two would only add a couple
of lines, which should suit everyone.

> > But don't force all those people without an MTA to install one just
> > because it's easier for you.
>
> Well, don't force me to use SMTP, just because it's easier for you!

I'm not, I didn't write portage!

> And also don't force me, to write "complicated" scripts, just because
> it's easier for you!

It's easier for me because it's there and it works.

> If portage would use the standard ways of sending
> mail, ie. /usr/sbin/sendmail, than this script wouldn't be necessary.
> MAYBE SMTP could be added as an *OPTION* - but I'd not add this, it's
> bloat.

It's not bloat, because the code is already there.

> > Or
> > will ssmtp handle this correctly?
>
> What "this"?

Sending mail from portage as per the OP's question.

> With my howto, /usr/sbin/sendmail is used to send out
> mail. Benefit of this is, that the "SMTP configuration" (ie. name
> of (smart-)host and possibly username+password) only has to be set
> at one spot - in the configuration file of the MTA. What MTA is
> chosen, is basically upto the user - but Gentoo seems to prefer
> ssmtp, which is totally fine and also is, what I'd suggest, as ssmtp
> is so easy to configure and offer's all, that's needed.

As I said, file a request on bugzilla. It sounds a reasonable option.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

To poldly bow air mobius gumby four: Trek on novocaine.