Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 01 Aug 2017 12:48:35 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 221149] mail/postfix-policyd-weight: rc script name issues when used with py27-salt-2016.11.5
Message-ID:  <bug-221149-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D221149

            Bug ID: 221149
           Summary: mail/postfix-policyd-weight: rc script name issues
                    when used with py27-salt-2016.11.5
           Product: Ports & Packages
           Version: Latest
          Hardware: Any
                OS: Any
            Status: New
          Severity: Affects Only Me
          Priority: ---
         Component: Individual Port(s)
          Assignee: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
          Reporter: danmcgrath.ca@gmail.com

Hi,

I ran into a bug (which might be related to a previous bug from
policyd-weight), at least in 2017Q3 branch that I am using. Namely it breaks
the saltstack "enable" service due to the way it does the lookup and checks=
 the
name and compares to the rc script name.

I am not exactly which package is at fault here, as it might be more of a
problem with salt and the logic is uses, than with policyd-weight.

The problem was with a state such as:

mail/postfix-policyd-weight:
  pkg:
    - installed
  service:
    - name: policyd-weight
    - running
    - enable: True

Salt is able to start this service, but it never modifies the rc.conf and it
doesn't understand the convention used, thus it would fail a restart of the
host/jail this state is applied to unless a salt highstate is run to correct
the issue.

While I can work around this with salt by manually editing the rc.conf, I
wonder if this bug needs to be revisited?

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-221149-13>