Hi, are there any news on this? Or do we have to go the way install old dovecot/remove it or upgrade instead of clean install? Because as the ssl-params executaböe is missing in 2.3.0 I don't know how else I should create it. If this file isn't even needed for 2.3.0 can it be a file with any content eg 'touch /var/lib/dovecot/ssl-parameters.dat' so that the file is just there and dovecot-init.servive doesn't want to call the /usr/libexec/dovecot/ssl-params executable?
Thanks, Thomas Am 02.02.2018 um 09:26 schrieb Aki Tuomi: > >> On February 2, 2018 at 5:09 AM TG Servers wrote: >> >> >> Hi, >> >> you definitely have a problem with the packages out of your own repo for >> version 2.3.0 and CentOS. >> And this is only if you do a clean install, meaning there was no lower >> dovecot version ever running on the system. >> >> If you want to 'systemctl start dovecot' it breaks with a dependency >> error which comes from dovecot-init.service. >> >> dovecot-init.service : >> [Unit] >> Description=One-time Dovecot init service >> ConditionPathExists=|!/var/lib/dovecot/ssl-parameters.dat >> ConditionPathExists=|!/etc/pki/dovecot/certs/dovecot.pem >> >> [Service] >> Type=oneshot >> RemainAfterExit=no >> ExecStart=/bin/sh -c '\ >> if [ ! -f /etc/pki/dovecot/certs/dovecot.pem ]; \ >> then\ >> SSLDIR=/etc/pki/dovecot/ >> OPENSSLCONFIG=/etc/pki/dovecot/dovecot-openssl.cnf >> /usr/libexec/dovecot/mkcert.sh /dev/null 2>&1;\ >> fi;\ >> if [ ! -f /var/lib/dovecot/ssl-parameters.dat ]; \ >> then\ >> /usr/libexec/dovecot/ssl-params >/dev/null 2>&1; \ >> fi' >> >> It wants to call /usr/libexec/dovecot/ssl-params if >> /var/lib/dovecot/ssl-parameters.dat (which is deprecated now as I >> understood) is not existing. >> The problem is in 2.3.0 /usr/libexec/dovecot/ssl-params is not existent >> anymore. >> >> This error does not occur if you for instance install 2.2.x from the >> base repo, start it once, and then update the version from your repo. >> This is because the ssl-parameters.dat was created with the old version >> then. >> >> But this should not be the expected behaviour I think. It should be >> possible to do a fresh install of 2.3.0 on a fresh system. >> >> Can you please get back to me on that? >> >> Thanks, >> Thomas > > > Thank you for reporting this, we'll look into it. > > --- > Aki Tuomi > > Dovecot oy >
