Hello. Hilko Bengen <ben...@debian.org> wrote: |> Wasn't heirloom-mailx (the predecessor of s-nail) the primary mailx |> provider for Debian? | |No, that must have been bsd-mailx. | |> In any event, h-m originally provided /usr/bin/mail and the upgrade path |> causes this to disappear. Scripts breaking due to mail(1) interface |> variations is a pain, but scripts breaking due to mail(1) disappearing |> altogether is a regression. | |Oh, I see. There are a number of packages which depend on |heirloom-mailx | mailx... Those packages need some grave bugs reported, |then. Damn. | |> When I read "/usr/bin/mail interface," that implies to me that there is |> a /usr/bin/mail executable. Was the description intended to mean |> something like "mailx-style interface?" | |To be honest, I don't know. I read that as the command-line user |interface one might know from mailx.
So here i as the maintainer of the subject jump in and remark that the problem of the bug report you pointed to was a non-standard option of the Debian bsd-mail, our command line is a superset of POSIX mailx. (Unfortunately v14.9.0 has still not landed, so that we offer no possibility to define custom headers; and it will not be the Debian -a i think it was, which, also if i recall correctly, has been patched into BSD-mail after Heirloom added -a for adding attachments, which i think of as a logical and good decision.) I wish a nice weekend nonetheless. --steffen
