Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 07:46:23 -0500 From: Jerry <jerry@seibercom.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "postfix-current" broken on amd64 platform Message-ID: <20111116074623.57d21ec1@scorpio> In-Reply-To: <4EC38223.1090400@FreeBSD.org> 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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 10:28:03 +0100 Pav Lucistnik articulated: > On 2011/11/16 02:56, Sahil Tandon wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 17:55:57 +0100, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > > > >> Jase Thew píše v út 15. 11. 2011 v 16:31 +0000: > >> > >>> What networking/DNS configuration is Pointyhat lacking (or have > >>> sufficiently different to break the socket code inside of > >>> postconf)? > >> > >> It is a purposefully no-networking sandbox jail. What networking > >> activity postconf wants to run? > > > > Wietse, in a post[1] on the Postfix mailing list, lends further > > credence to a suspicion that this issue is particular to pointyhat: > > > > Postconf opens a socket to determine the mynetworks value (it > > determines the local interfaces and their netmasks). > > > > 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. > > > > [1] http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2011-11/0385.html > > That's entirely possible. > > Is it a clever idea to hardcode local interfaces on build machine > into a package that will then be redistributed to other machines? > > 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. In any case, since Postfix does apparently build on FreeBSD with the exception of "pointyhat", perhaps the "BROKEN" tag should be removed from the port and just a warning message displayed that "pointyhat" cannot build/install the port successfully but that the end users mileage may vary. At the very least, it would be a more honest approach to the problem. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111116074623.57d21ec1>