From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 24 10:42:57 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3A916A4CE for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 10:42:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from 62-15-211-171.inversas.jazztel.es (62-15-211-171.inversas.jazztel.es [62.15.211.171]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0529443D46 for ; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 10:42:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es) Received: from redesjm.local (orion.redesjm.local [192.168.254.16]) j3OAgkiD004219; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 12:42:46 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from josemi@redesjm.local) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by redesjm.local (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id j3OAgj6D085600; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 12:42:45 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from josemi@redesjm.local) From: Jose M Rodriguez To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 12:42:45 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <20050414111426.775f6afd.lehmann@ans-netz.de> <200504240933.08799.josemi@redesjm.local> <200504241013.26838.ports@dino.sk> In-Reply-To: <200504241013.26838.ports@dino.sk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200504241242.45611.josemi@redesjm.local> X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir Milter (version: 1.1.0-3; AVE: 6.30.0.7; VDF: 6.30.0.116; host: antares.redesjm.local) cc: Milan Obuch Subject: Re: splitting courier-authlib into master+slave ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 10:42:57 -0000 El Domingo, 24 de Abril de 2005 10:13, Milan Obuch escribi=F3: > On Sunday 24 April 2005 09:33, Jose M Rodriguez wrote: > > El S=E1bado, 23 de Abril de 2005 23:33, Oliver Lehmann escribi=F3: > > > Milan Obuch wrote: > > > > On Saturday 23 April 2005 22:27, Oliver Lehmann wrote: > > > > > tomorrow i'll test if installing/deleting with packages works > > > > > as expected (adding/deleting user, sysconftool calls...) > > > > > > > > I did test this - installed meta port, dependency installed > > > > base port and userdb (selected method) port. Adding/deleting > > > > user courier works. To me this looks OK. I will test this > > > > against courier port (0.49 changed). Milan > > > > > > as a port or as a package? I've installed now all ports as > > > package and it looks like everything works as well. Of course, > > > the functional test I can only do with the vchkpw/vpopmail > > > interface. Used with courier-imap and sqwebmail. As far as I can > > > see, it works. > > > > > > Anything left? > > > > At last here, one potential problem arise: > > > > courier-authlib-base doesn't have any passwd components. > > ... which I consider to be good. It should be possible for user to > select which one he wants. > I don't think so. A common user expects couier-authlib be capable of=20 reading system passwd 'out of the box'. The rest must be selectable. > > I think we must take off courier-authlib-pwd and > > courier-authlib-pam and direct build courier-authlib-base with pam > > support. > > I do not agree here. To me this new design is better. I am building > mail servers with virtual hosting and I do not want any unneeded > components installed. Even small ones. > You may take out small component, but this is a system component. > > This makes courier-authlib-base a good substitute of > > courier-authlib in dependencies. > > For this particular problem, we should add a message telling 'no > authentication module installed'. I see here just one problem - base > port/package needs to be installed first, so this test will go to all > ports depending on courier-authlib... Or maybe after installing base > port we could just test the presence of options for meta port, and if > this file/directory does not exist, issue a warning message to the > user. This way we can even add confirmation request to the user. > This may fullfill your needs, but is a really ill system design. This=20 will end with courier-imap and so depends on courier-authlib-pam to=20 gets a minimal working setup. I think that this is better: --without-authcustom \ --without-authshadow \ + --without-authpwd \ + --with-authpam \ > To me this should be enough. If someone reads this message, he/she > should understand without authentication module every attempt fails. > If someone does not read install messages, well, we can't do anything > for him... Milan And you can't to disable authpam load in authdaemon to fullfill your=20 needs. Or are you able to do this without too much effort? Well, can we route the PRs to you? I Expect 'some mail' if=20 courier-authlib can't read system passwd 'out of the box'. =2D- josemi