From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 8 11:36:04 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE827106566C for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 11:36:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C17E8FC0C for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 11:36:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF26C2842C; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 13:36:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (ip-86-49-61-235.net.upcbroadband.cz [86.49.61.235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0755828427; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 13:35:55 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E68A89B.6040701@quip.cz> Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 13:35:55 +0200 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110420 Lightning/1.0b1 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sahil Tandon References: <4E368625.7010805@quip.cz> <4E370ADA.9060902@FreeBSD.org> <4E371284.5010806@quip.cz> <4E371B3B.7070806@FreeBSD.org> <4E3722DE.6050206@gmx.de> <20110802010139.GA981@magic.hamla.org> <4E37F71D.7070502@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: <4E37F71D.7070502@quip.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, ohauer@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: USERS/GROUPS in bsd.port.mk [was: FreeBSD Port: postfix-2.8.4, 1] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 11:36:04 -0000 Miroslav Lachman wrote: > Sahil Tandon wrote: >> On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 00:04:14 +0200, olli hauer wrote: >> >>> No, you don't hit the limitation. It seems you really found a bug in >>> the Framework! >>> >>> From the Framework code in bsd.port.mk existing groups should honored. >> >> Along those lines, what about using groupmod instead of usermod? >> Perhaps due to my ignorance, it seems more straightforward and does not >> require much sed-fu; I've attached a (probably incomplete) patch to >> illustrate my thinking. I understand what I am suggesting could >> introduce other problems, so please do not construe it as an as-is >> suggestion, but rather something to stoke discussion. > > I tested your patch and it works for me. > > # pkg_version -vIL = | grep postfix > postfix-2.7.2,1 < needs updating (index has 2.8.4,1) > > # id postfix > uid=125(postfix) gid=125(postfix) > groups=125(postfix),6(mail),3125(maildirs) > > # patch < ~/bsd.port.mk.diff > > # portmaster postfix-2.7.2,1 > > ===>>> The following actions were performed: > Upgrade of mysql-client-5.1.53 to mysql-client-5.1.58 > Upgrade of libtool-2.2.10 to libtool-2.4 > Upgrade of cyrus-sasl-2.1.23_1 to cyrus-sasl-2.1.23_3 > Upgrade of postfix-2.7.2,1 to postfix-2.8.4,1 > > # id postfix > uid=125(postfix) gid=125(postfix) > groups=125(postfix),6(mail),3125(maildirs) > > It was tested on really old testing system... > > Thank you for your time and working solution. Will the fix be committed to the ports tree? I upgraded Postfix on another machines yesterday and get the same error as reported month ago - upgrade removed postfix from manualy created group. Should I send PR for this? Miroslav Lachman