Re: [Nmh-workers] Alternative method for supporting TLS and latest patch set

[Earl Hood]

On February 1, 2010 at 22:06, Ken Hornstein wrote:

> I looked over your patches; I say commit 'em (I'd personally prefer that
> nmh had inline TLS support,...

I agree, but the changes are also applicable for any non-TLS mail
server that requires SASL.

The horse has definitely been pounded to death.  Maybe some
day nmh will have direct support for it.  I may look at it again
in the future.

BTW, I'm working on removing all uses of mktemp from the code
and trying to clean-up annoying warnings from gcc when compiling
code.

Hopefully, I do not break anything.  I'll try things it out for awhile
to see if anything breaks, but I do not use all the features of nmh,
so some changes will not really get tested.  I've taken the approach
of creating new functions that use mkstemp() and replacing all calles
to m_scratch() and m_tmpfil() with the new functions.

I'm unsure what the policy is for how stable the trunk is supposed
to be, so I hesitant to check in what I have done.

--ewh