From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 4 02:26:03 2009 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 ACE541065676 for ; Sat, 4 Apr 2009 02:26:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jeffrey@goldmark.org) Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com (out2.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 824AF8FC08 for ; Sat, 4 Apr 2009 02:26:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jeffrey@goldmark.org) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.internal [10.202.2.42]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAA9330F909; Fri, 3 Apr 2009 22:07:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 03 Apr 2009 22:07:43 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: Qoyt9xjVXkAuvkaF3F3E/M3mYCjDGpL0CXPqaBQtlQAN 1238810863 Received: from hagrid.ewd.goldmark.org (n114.ewd.goldmark.org [72.64.118.114]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4F6AD2A0B9; Fri, 3 Apr 2009 22:07:43 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <47443693-5C9A-48FF-A204-A9209D308993@goldmark.org> From: Jeffrey Goldberg To: ports@FreeBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 21:07:42 -0500 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Cc: mnag@FreeBSD.org Subject: postfix-policyd-spf 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: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 02:26:04 -0000 I have been having a terrible time trying to compile postfix-policyd- spf. Before I go into details, I'd like to ask whether there is an alternative way to get a postfix SPF milter running. If I can skip this package, I think I'll be much happier. postfix-policyd-spf specifically depends on LIB_DEPENDS= spf2.1:${PORTSDIR}/mail/libspf2-10 However, libspf2-10 won't build without a force because of a known security problem. $ cd ../libspf2-10/ [jeffrey@winky /usr/ports/mail/libspf2-10]$ sudo make clean ===> Cleaning for libspf2-1.0.4_1 [jeffrey@winky /usr/ports/mail/libspf2-10]$ sudo make build ===> libspf2-1.0.4_1 has known vulnerabilities: => libspf2 -- Buffer overflow. Reference: Now there is also a port, mail/libspf2 which is more current. And I can build that just fine. So I tried modifying the Makefile for postfix-policyd-spf thus #LIB_DEPENDS= spf2.1:${PORTSDIR}/mail/libspf2-10 LIB_DEPENDS= spf2:${PORTSDIR}/mail/libspf2 However, postfix-policyd-spf will not build against libspf2, complaining during configure: checking for strings.h... (cached) yes checking spf2/spf.h usability... no checking spf2/spf.h presence... yes configure: WARNING: spf2/spf.h: present but cannot be compiled configure: WARNING: spf2/spf.h: check for missing prerequisite headers? configure: WARNING: spf2/spf.h: see the Autoconf documentation configure: WARNING: spf2/spf.h: section "Present But Cannot Be Compiled" configure: WARNING: spf2/spf.h: proceeding with the preprocessor's result configure: WARNING: spf2/spf.h: in the future, the compiler will take precedence configure: WARNING: ## ------------------------------------------ ## configure: WARNING: ## Report this to the AC_PACKAGE_NAME lists. ## configure: WARNING: ## ------------------------------------------ ## checking for spf2/spf.h... yes checking for SPF_destroy_config in -lspf2... no libspf2 is required to build this program. ===> Script "configure" failed unexpectedly. Please report the problem to mnag@FreeBSD.org [maintainer] and attach the "/usr/ports/mail/postfix-policyd-spf/work/policyd-1.0.1/config.log" including the output of the failure of your make command. Also, it might be a good idea to provide an overview of all packages installed on your system (e.g. an `ls /var/db/pkg`). *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/ports/mail/postfix-policyd-spf. I emailed the maintainer about this sometime in December 2008 and was told that the problem had been fixed in October. It certainly isn't fixed as I see things. I will submit a proper PR about this, but I'm really just wondering if I'm missing something obvious. Or if there is some alternative way to get SPF checking with postfix. Cheers, -j -- Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/