GNU bug report logs - #28597
26.0.60; [Security] Configure should use --without-pop by default

Previous Next

Full log

Message #44 received at 28597 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Robert Pluim <rpluim <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: jwiegley <at> gmail.com, eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu, 28597 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 nljlistbox2 <at> gmail.com
Subject: Re: bug#28597: 26.0.60;
 [Security] Configure should use --without-pop by default
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 22:04:49 +0200

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Robert Pluim <rpluim <at> gmail.com>
>> Cc: John Wiegley <jwiegley <at> gmail.com>,  nljlistbox2 <at> gmail.com,  eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu,  28597 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 16:05:42 +0200
>> 
>> I thought we were discussing making --without-pop be the default even
>> if GNU Mailutils are not available, and it's what I'm
>> advocating. Paul's patch only did that if they were found.
>
> If that's what people want, fine with me on Posix platforms, but not
> on MS-Windows (where Mailutils are not available, and probably never
> will be).
>

I'll defer to you on MS-Windows affairs :-)

>> If that means that some people need to install GNU Mailutils, which
>> support secure(r) protocols, then I'm all in favour.
>
> But the effect of encouraging the installation of Mailutils will only
> be achieved if the configure script displays something about that.
> AFIU, the proposal was to make --without-pop the default and not
> display any message, in which case people just get movemail without
> POP3, and we might be silently breaking someone's setup.  Do we want
> that?

No, we don't. I'll see if I can come up with some verbiage over the
weekend, once I reconfigure my brain to (re-)understand autoconf

Robert

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.