Bug#398224: This is a design flaw

[Stephen Gran]

This one time, at band camp, Andreas Metzler said:
> I have a couple of questions about this:
> 
> How are you going to handle the "greylistd is removed but not purged
> case"?

you could test for the presence of the binary in your acl's, but that
adds yet another stat() to the setup.  I'm not sure how much that
matters, though.

> There is also the issue of adding two stat() calls for every forked
> daemon.

All things considered, that's a reasonably low overhead.

Can this not also be wrapped in an .ifdef to make it lower overhead?
Add a debconf question, priority low, that asks if the admin wants to
enable greylisting.  Write a file that just contains 
GREYLISTD = yes

on remove, rewrite the file (ucf handling or something would be nice) to
comment it.  Then the later calls could be wrapped like:
.ifdef GREYLISTD
.include_if_exists /path/to/acl_snippet
.endif

It's messy, but this is a general problem I have some interest in solving.
There are many add on packages that should be able to be drop in and
work with the MTAs in Debian, but we can't just munge other package's
config files, so I am trying to work towards a reasonably clean solution
to the general problem.

Take care,
-- 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
|   ,''`.                                            Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :                                        sgran at debian.org |
|  `. `'                        Debian user, admin, and developer |
|    `-                                     http://www.debian.org |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-exim4-maintainers/attachments/20061112/e3c9bbac/attachment.pgp