From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 5 10:12:17 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BB4710656B5; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 10:12:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sahil@tandon.net) Received: from aegis.hamla.org (aegis.hamla.org [206.251.255.39]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 624028FC14; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 10:12:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sahil@tandon.net) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aegis.hamla.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9F825C4E; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 06:13:46 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tandon.net; h= date:subject:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:in-reply-to:from:message-id:references:received :received:x-virus-scanned; s=aegis; t=1244196826; bh=IYHtBhNK80N YTpLxUhK9MCxVTA6iwXScuOeAm7XzHiw=; b=H8vFx1lhxafZ/yiiqKyExYhWtMW 0Lt9oQYsk0Q/XtkSspkrXcOz7bOa1BPWQtJpVBctF6o1MPWvkQ/4XgdipoCxfj3s NYaX3ee4ZAMjNvKB9pl7+LKewcSs/vSQ7qqTDopQeumiulXc24OOA9oVNtqy9euI P7LXR9HcjoqDVgGo= X-Virus-Scanned: by ClamAV at aegis.hamla.org Received: from aegis.hamla.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (aegis.hamla.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10027) with LMTP id ra3l59-CzXJM; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 06:13:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [10.179.29.240] (unknown [32.138.252.33]) by aegis.hamla.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AAA705C4C; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 06:13:45 -0400 (EDT) References: <4A279C92.4020305@quip.cz> <20090604135318.0178eb66@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <20090604130638.17461dkh10lqyhgk@webmail.leidinger.net> <4A27B1FC.6030904@quip.cz> <20090605042500.GA7167@tandon.net> <20090605101218.065861db@it.buh.tecnik93.com> Message-Id: <43F6F18A-403F-4001-807E-07C6102DEB83@tandon.net> From: Sahil Tandon To: Ion-Mihai Tetcu In-Reply-To: <20090605101218.065861db@it.buh.tecnik93.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (5H11) Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 5H11) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 06:12:07 -0400 Cc: Alexander Leidinger , Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz>, "freebsd-ports@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: has Postfix new location of aliases.db? 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: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 10:12:18 -0000 On Jun 5, 2009, at 3:12 AM, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 00:25:01 -0400 > Sahil Tandon wrote: > >> On Thu, 04 Jun 2009, Miroslav Lachman wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>> As you can see, file /etc/mail/aliases was modified (target of >>> symlink) and then aliases.db was generated by `newaliases` command >>> as /etc/aliases.db >>> >>> Above is with postfix-2.5.6,1 on FreeBSD 7.2-RELEASE #0: Fri May >>> 1 08:49:13 UTC 2009 GENERIC i386 >>> >>> This is with new postfix-2.6.1,1: >>> # postconf -d | grep aliases >>> alias_database =3D hash:/etc/mail/aliases >>> alias_maps =3D hash:/etc/mail/aliases >> >> This was introduced with ports/134728, in which ALIAS_DB_MAP is >> compiled in as hash:/etc/mail/aliases. I've rolled this back to the >> default value, which is system-dependent and chosen by >> ${WRKSRC}/src/util/sys_defs.h, which in turn relies on the >> ${WRKSRC}/makedefs script. >> >>> newaliases_path =3D /usr/local/bin/newaliases >> >> This is intentional and a good thing. In mail/postfix prior to >> 2.6.x, the change was made in main.cf instead of being compiled in as >> a default; this is why you do not see it when viewing the *default* >> postconf output in 2.5.x; try postconf newaliases_path (i.e. without >> the -d flag). >> >>> And this is with older postfix-2.5.6,1: >>> # postconf -d | grep aliases >>> alias_database =3D hash:/etc/aliases >>> alias_maps =3D hash:/etc/aliases >>> >>> There is definitely incompatible change in defaults :o( >> >> Indeed. The attached patch (also filed as ports/135273) updates >> Postfix to 2.6.2 and makes the aforementioned changes. > > Committed. > >> As a result, I don't think we need to touch ports/UPDATING. > > Oh yes, it's needed and committed. People that upgraded to 2.6.1 will > run into the same problem again ;-) > > It's always better to be verbose rather that sparse. > And it's even better not to violate POLA. Touch=C3=A9. Shame on myopic me. :) -- Sahil Tandon=