From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 16 19:40:01 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@smarthost.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D466545F for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 19:40:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A712F1180 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 19:40:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s0GJe1Ea007054 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 19:40:01 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id s0GJe11K007053; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 19:40:01 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 19:40:01 GMT Message-Id: <201401161940.s0GJe11K007053@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Tassilo Philipp Subject: Re: ports/181507: [PATCH] security/pks: fix autostart X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: Tassilo Philipp List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 19:40:01 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/181507; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Tassilo Philipp To: Graham Todd Cc: Edwin Groothuis , bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/181507: [PATCH] security/pks: fix autostart Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:37:31 -0600 Thanks for looking into this. > Thanks for this report. The good news is that folks are still using pks > and it builds with STAGE :-) Indeed - I'm using it, but have my doubts for the future. The entire key-server infrastructure as it exists currently blows a bit, to be honest: why don't they relay requests to each other, but have some weird syncing, and why does gnupg lookup one only, etc.. And the only alternative to pks seems to be unnecessarily bloated. Oh well.. So yes, there are people still using pks ;) > I can confirm this bug, however I don't think the patch as is should be > accepted. > > The use of 'daemon' seems a bit like a workaround for something that isn't > working quite correctly, but which I have been unable to track down. I > believe the issue appeared after there were changes made in the rc.subr > system and pksd.sh moved to pksd. Hm, I wasn't aware of that, I thought daemon was actually the way it was intended to be used... > The patch Tassilo submitted does fix the start on boot issue but breaks > onestart/onestatus/onestop behaviour. That's odd - I'm sure I used the one* commands with my patch... *scratches head*. Oh well, I ran into this 6 months ago, so maybe I'm not remembering anymore. > Setting a ${pidfile} fixes this > follow on issue (but doesn't feel like a complete solution either since I > am not sure why it changes the behaviour the way it does). The use of > "daemon" adds another running process after startup but I suppose this is > acceptable tradeoff. Thanks for looking into this in more detail. > In the next few days I will submit a modified patch that corrects the > start/onestart behaviours and a couple of other issues with the sample > configuration file and the rc script. > > I will use the present PR (ports/181507) to track the changes. Highly appreciated, thanks!