Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:19:07 -0400
From:      Paul Kraus <>
To:        Lowell Gilbert <>
Cc:, " List" <>,
Subject:   Re: 9.1 Postfix problem
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <44a9oxtfqv.fsf@lowell-desk.lan>
References:  <> <44a9oxtfqv.fsf@lowell-desk.lan>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Apr 17, 2013, at 10:04 AM, Lowell Gilbert =
<> wrote:

> 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,=20
> which changed the internal names of the port options to our brave new
> naming scheme.=20
> If you look in the Makefile clause for installing to base, renaming =
> 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.

	That was exactly the problem. I knew it was in the installation =
configuration *somewhere*, but I just could not find it. Thanks.

	Should I report this as a bug in the postfix port ?

Paul Kraus
Deputy Technical Director, LoneStarCon 3
Sound Coordinator, Schenectady Light Opera Company

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