From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 23 12:00:40 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96499BB8 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 12:00:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trashcan@odo.in-berlin.de) Received: from mx1.enfer-du-nord.net (mx1.enfer-du-nord.net [91.121.60.26]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C3432908 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 12:00:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.59.206.40] (unknown [82.113.99.40]) by mx1.enfer-du-nord.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3d4VXP3mtgzC93 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 14:00:37 +0200 (CEST) Subject: amavis[12345]: (12345-02) (!)file utility failed: exit 1 X-Sender: trashcan@odo.in-berlin.de From: Michael Grimm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10B329) Message-Id: Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 14:00:31 +0200 To: "freebsd-ports@freebsd.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.9.4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 12:00:40 -0000 Hi -- This is FreeBSD (9.2-STABLE, r256062), amavisd-new 2.8.0, and file 5.15. Mai= lserver including amavisd is running in a service jail. After a recent port upgrade of file to 5.15, I do get warnings like shown in= the subject line. In order to debug that issue I did replace the file 5.15 b= y the file 5.11 executable, and well, now those warning messages disappeared= . Here my questions: 1. Do others see those warning messages as well, running the combination ama= visd-new 2.8.0 and file 5.15? 2. Can one safely ignore those messages? 3. May "$file =3D '/usr/bin/file';" in amavisd.conf function as a valid work= around for the time being? (I have to admit that I didn't dare testing that, yet) Thanks and with kind regards, Michael