[pfx] Re: Update issue 3.8.5-3.9.0

2024-08-31 Thread Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users
On 8/31/24 15:41, Michael Orlitzky via Postfix-users wrote: On Sat, 2024-08-31 at 15:33 -0400, Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users wrote: My conclusion is: The mail_version set by 3.9.0 is not what is expected, but *this will only be a problem to you* if you have config directives that you no lo

[pfx] Re: Update issue 3.8.5-3.9.0

2024-08-31 Thread Michael Orlitzky via Postfix-users
On Sat, 2024-08-31 at 15:33 -0400, Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users wrote: > > My conclusion is: The mail_version set by 3.9.0 is not what is > expected, but *this will only be a problem to you* if you have config > directives that you no longer need ANYWAY. Go through main.cf and clean > up

[pfx] Re: Update issue 3.8.5-3.9.0

2024-08-31 Thread Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users
On 8/31/24 15:02, Michael Orlitzky via Postfix-users wrote: On Sun, 2024-09-01 at 04:41 +1000, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote: How did you get Postfix to believe its version is "3.9". There was never such a release. Official Postfix release versions always have a micro "patch level".

[pfx] Re: Update issue 3.8.5-3.9.0

2024-08-31 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Michael Orlitzky via Postfix-users: > On Sun, 2024-09-01 at 04:41 +1000, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users > wrote: > > > > How did you get Postfix to believe its version is "3.9". There was > > never such a release. Official Postfix release versions always have > > a micro "patch level". > > L

[pfx] Re: Update issue 3.8.5-3.9.0

2024-08-31 Thread Michael Orlitzky via Postfix-users
On Sun, 2024-09-01 at 04:41 +1000, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote: > > How did you get Postfix to believe its version is "3.9". There was > never such a release. Official Postfix release versions always have > a micro "patch level". Looks to be from #define MAIL_VERSION_NUMBER "3.

[pfx] Re: Update issue 3.8.5-3.9.0

2024-08-31 Thread Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users
On Sat, Aug 31, 2024 at 07:59:04PM +0200, Ralph Seichter via Postfix-users wrote: > * Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users: > > > Don't know whether it's a Gentoo specific issue, but Postfix failed to > > restart after update because the new lib directory was created as > > /usr/lib64/postfix/3.9,

[pfx] Re: Update issue 3.8.5-3.9.0

2024-08-31 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users: > Don't know whether it's a Gentoo specific issue, but Postfix failed to > restart after update because the new lib directory was created as > /usr/lib64/postfix/3.9, not /usr/lib64/postfix/3.9.0. That's a Gentoo thing. Wietse _

[pfx] Re: Update issue 3.8.5-3.9.0

2024-08-31 Thread Ralph Seichter via Postfix-users
* Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users: > Don't know whether it's a Gentoo specific issue, but Postfix failed to > restart after update because the new lib directory was created as > /usr/lib64/postfix/3.9, not /usr/lib64/postfix/3.9.0. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. Here is what I se

[pfx] Re: Update issue 3.8.5-3.9.0

2024-08-31 Thread Bill Cole via Postfix-users
On 2024-08-31 at 12:48:51 UTC-0400 (Sat, 31 Aug 2024 12:48:51 -0400) Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users is rumored to have said: Don't know whether it's a Gentoo specific issue, It must be. but Postfix failed to restart after update because the new lib directory was created as /usr/lib64/pos

[pfx] Update issue 3.8.5-3.9.0

2024-08-31 Thread Phil Stracchino via Postfix-users
Don't know whether it's a Gentoo specific issue, but Postfix failed to restart after update because the new lib directory was created as /usr/lib64/postfix/3.9, not /usr/lib64/postfix/3.9.0. -- Phil Stracchino Fenian House Publishing ph...@caerllewys.net p...@co.ordinate.org Landlin

[pfx] Re: Correct (least-privilege) way to access /var/spool/postfix/public/qmgr

2024-08-31 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Laura Smith via Postfix-users: > > > > > They should instead read output from "postqueue -j" which provides > > information in JSON format. JSON support was added in Postfix 3.1 > > (i.e. in 2015). > > > > What are the minimum permissions required for postqueue ? The postqueue command is exec

[pfx] Re: Correct (least-privilege) way to access /var/spool/postfix/public/qmgr

2024-08-31 Thread Laura Smith via Postfix-users
> They should instead read output from "postqueue -j" which provides > information in JSON format. JSON support was added in Postfix 3.1 > (i.e. in 2015). > What are the minimum permissions required for postqueue ? postqueue run as an unprivileged user returns : - no output - 0 exit code Bo