From nobody Wed Jun 30 14:00:16 2021 X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 889E6CFC432 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 14:00:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=xan6=LY=klop.ws=ronald-lists@realworks.nl) Received: from smtp-relay-int.realworks.nl (smtp-relay-int.realworks.nl [194.109.157.24]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4GFNJz03mnz4Thd for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 14:00:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=xan6=LY=klop.ws=ronald-lists@realworks.nl) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 16:00:16 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=klop.ws; s=rw2; t=1625061616; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=nDgCowjl+rIJcogP1hYXkjYG6+pILEUHmIfzDPKS/kc=; b=otTDUQ+xf6RfNYKlX3in/BzGg53gXuzYNySESjYMevhEcDPD2mdb9wAnIVf+OPdeEPwyTt kX8ydrMsHaXkvLN2S5bJ8vjyYObTLfHsbEWWkd1eFdFOwRLLauIXam/DR5e474wxq3jlRY AEL20SrA2ydTudpZ9oUst75I0kamBbPAI1Y4l6QokYhFM/E18LClFpA9jkzY9K3xQBiZfo MGiMrXQJ32drLQaAuNjrwNNmIIv4JtGuYcF1EkazNdtANcJPhOGGjgw9/D2wBPO8y91v3X Vrv9Hie2CWBJ001mqk9j9eHuQ8zeNaFb2K6TCsBR/Q8cQ2apXt3u0BDZIvZuow== From: Ronald Klop To: "Dan Mahoney (Gushi)" Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <819714705.77.1625061616562@localhost> In-Reply-To: <8882764-18c5-9aa2-618a-c144f8d35ef@prime.gushi.org> References: <27a72fde-d96c-25e6-ff62-85767da510b7@prime.gushi.org> <8882764-18c5-9aa2-618a-c144f8d35ef@prime.gushi.org> Subject: Re: DMA -- difference between base and port? List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_76_741453501.1625061616552" X-Mailer: Realworks (566.1265.62981dde0eb) Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4GFNJz03mnz4Thd X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=klop.ws header.s=rw2 header.b=otTDUQ+x; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=klop.ws; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of SRS0=xan6=LY=klop.ws=ronald-lists@realworks.nl designates 194.109.157.24 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=SRS0=xan6=LY=klop.ws=ronald-lists@realworks.nl X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.14 / 15.00]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_VERYGOOD(0.00)[194.109.157.24:from]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[klop.ws:s=rw2]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:194.109.157.0/24]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.94)[-0.936]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[klop.ws:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; HAS_X_PRIO_THREE(0.00)[3]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[194.109.157.24:from]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[klop.ws,none]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[ronald-lists@klop.ws,SRS0=xan6=LY=klop.ws=ronald-lists@realworks.nl]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:3265, ipnet:194.109.0.0/16, country:NL]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[ronald-lists@klop.ws,SRS0=xan6=LY=klop.ws=ronald-lists@realworks.nl]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-ports] X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: Y ------=_Part_76_741453501.1625061616552 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Van: "Dan Mahoney (Gushi)" Datum: donderdag, 31 december 2020 02:23 Aan: Ronald Klop CC: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Onderwerp: Re: DMA -- difference between base and port? > > On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, Ronald Klop wrote: > > > Some questions below. > > >> On Mon, 21 Dec 2020, Ronald Klop wrote: > >> >>> On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 12:12:02 +0100, Dan Mahoney (Gushi) >>> wrote: > >>> >>>> Hey there, > >>>> At the day job we've been using mail/dma port for a number of years now, >>>> and the rollout and config of files in /usr/local/etc/dma is part of our >>>> deploy process. > >>>> It only recently occurred to us that there was a "dma" in base since >>>> probably 11.0 (whomever wrote the release notes missed that -- and the >>>> manpage doesn't mention when it was added to FreeBSD). > >>>> We notice that the "newaliases" function in /etc/mail/mailer.conf is >>>> missing from the port version -- which means if you're using ports dma, >>>> you probably want to set newaliases to something like /usr/bin/true (dma >>>> doesn't use an aliases db, so there's no need to rebuild one, as >>>> newaliases would). Again. something we noticed in our deployment process >>>> with puppet. > > > > > > Why are you calling newaliases if dma does not use an aliases db? > > Standards. This is the reason mailutil *and* DMA support a newaliases function (why the manpage for DMA suggests it, and why DMA supports it). > > As a matter of sysadminnery regardless of installed mailer, it's considered standard practice: When you update the alias file, you run newaliases. This is, for example, how we have made our puppet manifests work, so it is mailer agnostic. > > If you do not have something in mailer.conf for newaliases, you get an error. > > >> 1) No released version will work with "newaliases" unless "newaliases" is >> called as a bareword (so calling /usr/bin/newaliases, as puppet does, >> causes you to get a "no recipients" error) This is fixed in dma head, but >> not in either the current port version, or the freebsd base version. > >> > > > > > I'm a bit confused. You say "this is fixed in dma head". I see no matching > commit about this fix after 0.13 release in > https://github.com/corecode/dma/commits/master . > > The commit didn't mention this exact issue, but it's: > > https://github.com/corecode/dma/commit/98bd7fdfd426048d5bffe459d9be643e3033f225 > > They changed from using $argv[0] (which would have to match only the bareword, like newaliases) to the basename, which strips the rest of the path if the code is called with one. > > If you doubt this, just point mailutil at dma, and call it as /usr/bin/newaliases > > Our puppet manifests were calling /usr/bin/newaliases, so we hit this. > > Hope these clarify things. > > -Dan > > -- > > --------Dan Mahoney-------- > Techie, Sysadmin, WebGeek > Gushi on efnet/undernet IRC > FB: fb.com/DanielMahoneyIV > LI: linkedin.com/in/gushi > Site: http://www.gushi.org > --------------------------- > > > > Hi, I don't know if you are still using it, but the port got updated to the latest upstream version this afternoon. https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/commit/?id=a5446834816f9ba1733f022f62b5b8166012ae24 Does this help your issue? Regards, Ronald. ------=_Part_76_741453501.1625061616552--