[Dovecot] [RFC] FreeBSD port for dovecot 1.1 series
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I have put together a preliminary patchset for dovecot 1.1 at:
http://people.freebsd.org/~delphij/misc/dovecot-1.1-rc4.diff
My intention is to repocopy the current dovecot port to dovecot11 and
make changes on the latter. In this version of patchset, I have
intentionally removed the following chunk of change which by default
allows gid=0 users to log in.
%%%
@@ -333,6 +338,7 @@
~ # belongs to supplementary groups with non-valid GIDs, those groups are
~ # not set.
~ #first_valid_gid = 1
+first_valid_gid = 0
~ #last_valid_gid = 0
~ # Maximum number of running mail processes. When this limit is reached,
%%%
Please let me know if you want more features, have comments, etc., for
the FreeBSD port. I am subscribed to this list but I would appreciate
if you could use 'Reply all' which will give me more opportunity to get
your e-mail from the thousands I receive :)
Cheers,
- --
Xin LI
Xin LI wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I have put together a preliminary patchset for dovecot 1.1 at:
http://people.freebsd.org/~delphij/misc/dovecot-1.1-rc4.diff
My intention is to repocopy the current dovecot port to dovecot11 and make changes on the latter. In this version of patchset, I have intentionally removed the following chunk of change which by default allows gid=0 users to log in.
%%% @@ -333,6 +338,7 @@ ~ # belongs to supplementary groups with non-valid GIDs, those groups are ~ # not set. ~ #first_valid_gid = 1 +first_valid_gid = 0 ~ #last_valid_gid = 0
~ # Maximum number of running mail processes. When this limit is reached, %%%
Please let me know if you want more features, have comments, etc., for the FreeBSD port. I am subscribed to this list but I would appreciate if you could use 'Reply all' which will give me more opportunity to get your e-mail from the thousands I receive :)
Cheers, - -- Xin LI
http://www.delphij.net/
First, I apologize for sitting on my attempt so long, work got busy. But just now I did a diff between your result and mine, and some notes: - I added a CONFLICTS?= ${PORTNAME}-1.0.* because using portupgrade on other ports such as postfix tries to pull in dovecot-1.0 as a runtime depend whether or not 1.1 is already installed and that makes a mess. I also added a similar line to the dovecot 1.0 port, which was probably the more important place. - Otherwise, you port looks extremely similar in important functionality to mine. Although one of the reasons I did not submit it earlier was I had hoped to add an OPTIONS entry and appropriate pkg-plist support for some of the newer optional support offered by 1.1, but I don't use any of them myself. Its probably better to have a dovecot 1.1 port even without that part done.
Is there a date when dovecot 11 will hit the ports tree, i like to test it also.
regards, Johan Hendriks Schavemaker Transport
participants (3)
-
Adam McDougall
-
Johan Hendriks
-
Xin LI