Anyone fancy giving an explicit ok for this? Preferably someone who
uses spamd?
On 2022/04/15 22:00, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> jturner had a problem with this, here's a diff on top of what was
> committed.
>
> - I think the first line is superfluous as /etc/rc.d/rc.subr has some
> special case for this (and I think this maybe responsible for a problem
> which jturner ran into)
>
> - look for the pflog interface passed in flags and init that
>
> I think this is probably correct within the bounds of how spamlogd
> currently works but some tests would be appreciated (as would
> any improvements to the chicken scratches)
>
> Index: spamlogd
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/etc/rc.d/spamlogd,v
> retrieving revision 1.5
> diff -u -p -r1.5 spamlogd
> --- spamlogd 11 Apr 2022 09:32:20 -0000 1.5
> +++ spamlogd 15 Apr 2022 21:00:10 -0000
> @@ -9,11 +9,13 @@ daemon="/usr/libexec/spamlogd"
> rc_reload=NO
>
> rc_pre() {
> - [[ ${spamd_flags} != NO && ${spamd_black} == NO ]] && return 1
> + pflog=$(echo $daemon_flags | sed -En 's/.*-l *(pflog[0-9]+).*/\1/p')
> + pflog=${pflog:-pflog0}
> +
> if pfctl -si | grep -q Enabled; then
> - ifconfig pflog0 create
> - if ifconfig pflog0; then
> - ifconfig pflog0 up
> + ifconfig $pflog create
> + if ifconfig $pflog; then
> + ifconfig $pflog up
> else
> return 1
> fi
>
