Re: Pseudo code included. Is it a small step towards better LSB compliance for sendmail interface?

--- On Wed, 1/25/12, Nick Leverton wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 02:30:20PM -0800, Regid Ichira wrote:
> >=A0=A0=A0Is this pseudo code a small step towards better lsb compliance =
for
> > sendmail interface?
> ...snips
> > +=A0 =A0 fstdout << "550 Refuse communication by SMTP commands on stdin=
/stdoutd" << endl;
> > +
>=20
> I don't feel so, I'm afraid.=A0 It's just another way of notifying caller=
s
> that you don't offer an SMTP submission interface.
>=20

  Isn't it an attempt to notify callers in a a way that sendmail -bs might
notify them?  My understanding of the lsb requirement is to mimic
sendmail -bs.  I think Sendmail -bs might reply by denying the user from
sending a message, in a way that is in accordance with the SMTP protocol.
Does the lsb actually forces the system to queue the message and attempt to
send it?