On Thu, 23 May 1996, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I'd like to point out that this revised version won't work either.
> Backquotes are legal, are they not, for example ?
Oh, rats. This just shows the wisdom of issuing restrictive definitions
that can be widened later rather than wide-open things that are sure to
cause trouble in unforseen places. RFC 822 is a real pain. I'm sure
nobody ever actually uses | or ` in local_parts, and yet we have to
permit them. Mutter.
> What you need is a mechanism for supplying the address to the command
> as one argument - *without running a shell*.
Yes. Perhaps I should always run the command as it is run in the
"restrict_path" mode, which is not to run a shell, and to handle the
arguments as you suggest. As you say, in an unrestricted situation
people can always explicitly ask for a shell if they want one.
I will work on this for the next release, but I don't think it's enough
of a show-stopper to prevent the current release going out as Beta next
week.
--
Philip Hazel University Computing Service,
ph10@??? New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG,
P.Hazel@??? England. Phone: +44 1223 334714
