From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Simon Josefsson Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: smtpmail.el Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 22:51:42 +0200 (CEST) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1019854460 22884 127.0.0.1 (26 Apr 2002 20:54:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 20:54:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 171CjU-0005wy-00 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 22:54:20 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 171CmI-0002YA-00 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 22:57:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 171CjQ-0000nk-00; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 16:54:16 -0400 Original-Received: from 178.230.13.217.in-addr.dgcsystems.net ([217.13.230.178] helo=yxa.extundo.com) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 171Cgx-0000dd-00; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 16:51:43 -0400 Original-Received: from yxa.extundo.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by yxa.extundo.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3QKpgKg021868; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 22:51:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost (jas@localhost) by yxa.extundo.com (8.12.2/8.12.1/Submit) with ESMTP id g3QKpg7t021865; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 22:51:42 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: yxa.extundo.com: jas owned process doing -bs Original-To: Sam Steingold In-Reply-To: Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:3324 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:3324 Yes, it looks alright. Except possible to `else' clause, isn't it OK to warn about if no supported mechanism was supported? I'm not sure just ignoring it is OK. Well, the server would reject the submission saying that no authentication was performed, but the user would be somewhat surprised since she did supply credentials, but the real problems was that smtpmail.el didn't support the SASL mechanism offered by the server. On 26 Apr 2002, Sam Steingold wrote: > Your recent patches to smtpmail.el broke it for me. > In `smtpmail-try-auth-methods', the `supported-extensions' does not > have 'auth, so `mechs' is nil, `mech' is nil, and I am asked for a > (useless!) password before getting > (error "Mechanism %s not implemented" nil) > For now, I just use the appended patch. > Is it okay to check it in? > >