Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 13:52:42 +0100 From: Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Cc: wietse@porcupine.org Subject: Re: "postfix-current" broken on amd64 platform Message-ID: <20111116125242.GH68080@home.opsec.eu> In-Reply-To: <20111116074623.57d21ec1@scorpio> References: <20111114083713.29fbecda@scorpio> <20111115022430.GA19970@magic.hamla.org> <1321350319.84509.2.camel@hood.oook.cz> <2859B9B3-0A75-40FD-B444-8885A6589A37@tandon.net> <4EC293FF.2000607@beardz.net> <1321376158.2315.1.camel@hood.oook.cz> <20111116015655.GB20552@magic.hamla.org> <4EC38223.1090400@FreeBSD.org> <20111116074623.57d21ec1@scorpio>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi! > > > Postconf opens a socket to determine the mynetworks value (it > > > determines the local interfaces and their netmasks). [quote http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2011-11/0385.html] > > > I have heard about bizarre errors on FreeBSD (jail) systems where > > > the user-land library was out of sync with kernel-land, resulting > > > in data structure mis-matches and system calls returning > > > nonsensical results. > > Is it a clever idea to hardcode local interfaces on build machine > > into a package that will then be redistributed to other machines? No. > > Sounds like postfix will have to do without official packages on > > FreeBSD from now on. > > I would find that unacceptable. If the problem is with FreeBSD as > Wietse has indicated, then the problem should be rectified on the > FreeBSD side of the equation. Well, the problem is on both sides. On FreeBSD, one can have "systems" without any interface -- and postfix assumes that every system it is built on has some kind of interface. So, maybe it's time to change that assumption for the postfix built process, if possible ? -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 9 years to go !
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111116125242.GH68080>