On 2011/11/16 14:18, olli hauer wrote:
On 2011-11-16 10:28, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
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.
What about the attached diff until we found the exact issue.
Unbreak the port, and use MANUAL_PACKAGE_BUILD instead.
MANUAL_PACKAGE_BUILD is fine with me.
--
Pav Lucistnik <p...@oook.cz>
<p...@freebsd.org>
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
