Am 27.09.2014 um 16:42 schrieb Wietse Venema: > li...@rhsoft.net: >> Am 27.09.2014 um 16:32 schrieb Wietse Venema: >>> b...@bitrate.net: >>>> On Sep 27, 2014, at 07.48, Wietse Venema <wie...@porcupine.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Use "postconf -d", not "postconf -n". -n is for settings in the >>>>> configuration file, -d is for the built-in settings which include >>>>> the version, release date, and so on. >>>> >>>> this reminds me - some time long ago, i happened to notice that >>>> config_directory seems to be the lone exception to the postconf >>>> -n behavior described in postconf(1). it's not of much consequence, >>>> at least for me, but i was just curious why [presuming it's >>>> intentional]. >>> >>> I suppose your idea is to put the main.cf file in a different >>> location, then specify that location in the main.cf file, and not >>> create a chicken-and-egg problem >> >> i suppose the question was why it is part of "postconf -n" >> output while it is not mentioned in "main.cf" and so should >> only appear in "postconf -d" >> >> [root@mail-gw:~]$ cat main.cf | grep config_directory >> [root@mail-gw:~]$ postconf -n | grep config_directory >> config_directory = /etc/postfix > > You're welcome to fix that. I'm now working on other things, > supporting per-milter and per-policy service settings
i don't get why you felt attacked by a question
