On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Iacopo Benesperi <iacchi86@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Paul Lesniewski ha scritto: > > > I guess that'd work. But no, there was a discussion in the past > > couple months where someone asked this question and a couple people > > said they send the username and password in the page request to > > redirect.php. Just look at what gets sent from login.php when logging > > in as usual and you'll see what you need to send to redirect.php if > > that's how you want to do it. > > Maybe because of my poor english, I haven't understood the meaning of > your "But no": you mean that it should work theoretically but it won't > work in practice, No > or you mean that it will work and that, in addiction, > there's the GET method? Yes, although at the very least, POST is recommended. > Maybe I've misunderstood the login:auto explanation, but it should > bypass the login function in redirect.php and use one of its own, > shouldn't it? No, it just bypasses login.php and goes directly to redirect.php > > Why not just try it? Changing the directory that the cookie applies > > to might be the hard part. You just have to make sure the cookie will > > be picked up again by SquirrelMail. > > I can't try it because I don't have an imap server on my pc and I don't > want to install one (I don't need it). SquirelMail can use an IMAP server that is not local. > I believe the expiration time > isn't a problem in any way; the problem could be the $base_uri variable. > Now: php.net says that "/" means all the domain, so I think even the > squirrelmail subdir. > If SM has problem with "/" I can set the right base_uri, but the problem > is that i don't know what to write into. Is there a document which > explains the meaning of $base_uri? I've tried to search in the ML but I > haven't found anything. grep the source code. Also see the function sqm_baseuri(). It's the SM base URI as the name suggests. > > You should *always* have a test environment. The sysadmin should > > understand this - why would they want to have you install untested > > software on a live server? > > I can think about three good reasons: > 1. We don't have a spare server Very poor excuse. Spare servers are very cheap, especially at a school where there are always extras to be had (server != expensive non-workstation) > 2. I believe it isn't simple to build a test environment on the living > server Depends. Sometimes it is *very* easy. SquirrelMail is easy, not sure about your CMS. > 3. Even if it's possible, the sysadmin doesn't know how to do it or he > won't waste his time this way anyway Then he should be prepared to have someone install broken code on his server and pay the price when it breaks and users complain to him. There is not any excuse for this behavior/attitude. > Whe worst thing that can happens during the installation is that the CMS > won't work, but this is just how it's now, so is not a big problem. I > already know I'll need at least 2 hours to get everything up if > everythig works fine and that users can have problems in the mean time; > but just three days ago the server has been unavailable for all the > week-end because some power plug has decided to break and noone is > working in the w-e. Some hours of problems are not a problem. > Unfortunately, this is what I have to deal with. Good luck ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ ----- squirrelmail-users mailing list Posting guidelines: http://squirrelmail.org/postingguidelines List address: squirrelmail-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx List archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.squirrelmail.user List info (subscribe/unsubscribe/change options): https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-users
