On May 9, 2010, at 7:35 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > execve() fails with error number 1. You can look that number up in > /usr/include/sys/errno.h (or whatever the pathname is on MacOS). > But, MacOS is a descendant of FreeBSD, and on my machine: > > #define EPERM 1 /* Operation not permitted */
You are absolutely correct. > Now the question is why execve() fails with EPERM. > > On UNIX systems, EPERM does not report a file permission problem. > Instead: > > 1 EPERM Operation not permitted. An attempt was made to perform an oper- > ation limited to processes with appropriate privileges or to the > owner of a file or other resources. > > For example, only the owner (or root) can change the owner or > permissions of a file; everyone gets an EPERM error. The same error > is returned when a non-root process attempts to raise some resource > limit beyond its hard limit. > > Unfortunately, I see no EPERM error in the FreeBSD exec.c library > module or in the kern_exec.c kernel side. Perhaps MacOS has "extra > security" features similar to Systrace or AppArmor that interfere > with Postfix operation, or you are using a weird file system that > burps errors. So if I can find out what this security policy is, and disable it, the print confirmation emails will go thru? Thank you once again for looking into my problem. Jamal
