Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:04:56 -0400
From:      Lowell Gilbert <>
To:        Paul Kraus <>
Cc:, " List" <>,
Subject:   Re: 9.1 Postfix problem
Message-ID:  <44a9oxtfqv.fsf@lowell-desk.lan>
In-Reply-To: <> (Paul Kraus's message of "Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:16:20 -0400")
References:  <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
Paul Kraus <> writes:

> 	When building postfix under 91. I am running into an odd
> problem. I use the INST_BASE option, which seems to cause the problem
> (it worked fine with 9.0). The 'make' goes fine, but the 'make
> install' fails when trying to install the startup script to
> /usr/etc/rc.d instead of /etc/rc.d. It works fine if INST-BASE is
> disabled. I looked through the Makefile but could not suss out how
> that difference in configuration was actually causing the problem.
> 	Has anyone else run into this problem and what was the fix (or did you just install into /usr/local) ?

I use /usr/local, but this seems to be a typo in the last checkin, 
which changed the internal names of the port options to our brave new
naming scheme. 

If you look in the Makefile clause for installing to base, renaming the
option itself went correctly, but both halves of the '.if' now invoke
USE_RC_SUBR. That's correct for PREFIX, but for installing into base
should be USE_RCORDER instead.

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>