Good idea checking with Himself.
Just for my clarity - you're recompiling imap only and the rest is all IBM
stuff (i.e. no external stuff like PADL etc?)
At 02:14 PM 7/27/2006, Andrew J Herbert wrote:
Ah, we have a few AIX systems, but only one is at 5.3 level and has PAM,
it also had a broken native compiler, hence me using gcc. Our bigger
system, and the one we're actually building imapd for will be getting
upgraded, I think over this weekend, so I won't be able to try a native
compile until next week, so please don't trouble yourself about it quite
yet, I'll post back if I fail to get it running using a41 and the native
compiler.
___ ___
/___\ herbie <at> uic <dot> edu /___\
(o\|/o) There is no such thing as illegal
immigrants, (o\|/o)
U^^^U only illegal Governments. - (Ambalavaner Sivanandan, 1997) U^^^U
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006, Mark Crispin wrote:
> We are getting rid of our AIX systems (hooray!) and none of them had PAM.
> So I don't know much about how IBM implemented PAM; there are subtle
> differences (e.g., the need to use use PASSWDTYPE=pmb on Solaris) in
> different ports.
>
> The other issue is that you're using gcc; we always use IBM's compiler.
> The ga4 build was a contributed build and I can't vouch for its
> correctness.
>
> You're using gcc4 which is quite a bit different from earlier versions of
> gcc. I doubt very much that ga4 was for gcc4. gcc4 explains the
> > warning: pointer targets in assignment differ in signedness
> > warning: pointer targets in passing argument differ
> messages. This behavior is new to gcc4; it is less permissive with
> implicit casting between char* and unsigned char* that other compilers
> (including earlier versions of gcc).
>
> On top of that, I'm really suspicious of your report that you can't get
> 2004g to compile without SSL. This suggests a systemic problem, such as
> improper compile flags; because people regularly compile without SSL (in
> spite of recommendations not to do so!). I would not recommend running
> 2002e in production in any case; it is old and has known problems.
>
> This, however, is quite serious:
> > osdep.c: In function 'checkpw':
> > osdep.c:148: warning: assignment from incompatible pointer type
> osdep.c is an assembled file; very likely this is in ckp_pam.c. This
> points to some incompatibility in AIX's implementation of PAM.
>
> So, the first thing that I would try is using IBM's compiler with 2004e or
> 2006. If all is well, then call it good. If not, then send me a complete
> transcript of the build (from scratch - do a "make clean" first) and I'll
> see what I can determine. I may not be able to get to it until Monday.
>
> One last thing: do you actually intend to run in production without SSL?
> Or are you building without SSL just to simplify testing?
>
> -- Mark --
>
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.
>
_______________________________________________
Imap-uw mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
_______________________________________________
Imap-uw mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
