From owner-freebsd-ports  Thu Oct 16 21:07:41 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA17214
          for ports-outgoing; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports)
Received: from coconut.itojun.org (root@coconut.itojun.org [210.160.95.97])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA17205;
          Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:07:30 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from itojun@itojun.org)
From: itojun@itojun.org
Received: from localhost (itojun@localhost.itojun.org [127.0.0.1])
	by coconut.itojun.org (8.8.5/3.6Wbeta6) with ESMTP id NAA24455;
	Fri, 17 Oct 1997 13:06:52 +0900 (JST)
To: Chris Dillon <cdillon@tri-lakes.net>
cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG
In-reply-to: cdillon's message of Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:53:37 GMT.
      <XFMail.971016225733.cdillon@tri-lakes.net> 
X-Template-Reply-To: itojun@itojun.org
X-Template-Return-Receipt-To: itojun@itojun.org
X-PGP-Fingerprint: F8 24 B4 2C 8C 98 57 FD  90 5F B4 60 79 54 16 E2
Subject: Re: Problem with Hylafax 
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 13:06:52 +0900
Message-ID: <24451.877061212@coconut.itojun.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


>This is correct, however, i don't have a DNS server setup on this machine,
>nor does my ISP have any clue in hell about DNS, (try and reverse my usual
>dialup address, 207.3.81.149, using any DNS server in the world... then use
>one of theirs, such as 207.3.81.5... I've bugged them about this for ages
>since it prevents me from connecting to sites who require reverse lookups
>to work) I DO have a hostname set with /bin/hostname (wyze.tri-lakes.net). 
>This, however, was not a problem previously.  Hylafax worked fine some time
>ago even with my 'bogus' hostname.

	It should be fine if you have /etc/hosts properly set...
	how about /etc/host.conf?  is it properly set?

>Someone did suggest that bash was the
>culprit, and so I am reinstalling Hylafax (already removed it again.. might
>as well test a patch while I'm at it) with its dependancy for bash1
>changed to bash2.
>Hmmm.. no luck with bash2 there. Still does a SIGSEGV.. Now to see if maybe
>I can fix that problem and supply a patch. :-)

	bash will only be used at the installation(more exactly, "configure")
	time, so this won't change the behavior much.

itojun