Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
\mail\postfix-XXX Older versions of Postfix \mail\postfix-stableLatest stable version of Postfix \mail\postfix-current Experimental version of Postfix Based on the goal of user-friendliness and principle of least surprise I'd vote for changing -current to -experimental. It is a FreeBSD naming convention for -current to mean experimental (alpha, rc, ...) but for those who are not regularly involved with the FreeBSD release cycle this is not intuitive. Longer-term at least, there is user-friendliness to be gained by switching to a more descriptive name than -current to describe pre-released software. Note also that Wietse uses FreeBSD and usually follows BSD naming conventions but has chosen not to in this case. IMO, Roger As each "experimental" becomes stable, it is given a "postfix-stable" designation and the old stable release is given a "postfix-XXX" designation. The new postfix experimental release then assumes the "postfix-current" title. My only concern with changing the name "postfix-current" to "postfix-devel" or whatever is for historical purposes. I have always known it by the latter designations plus I am not sure if it would cause a problem in the ports system if it were to be renamed. In any case, the "postfix" ports were always kept up-to-date in virtual real time. Now they seem to lag behind. I am unsure as to what has happened. -- Carmel ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
Yay, great, thanks!!! mail/postfix-current at 3.2-20160224 mail/postfix at 3.1.0 mail/postfix211 at 2.11.7 Mark ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 02:45:25 +0100, Mark Martinec stated: >|Obviously, the ports are not in sync with the current Stable and >|Experimental branches of Postfix. > >Olli Hauer wrote: >> No they are not and I plan the following to let users some time >> for the transition to 3.1. >> - mail/postfix (2.11.7) -> mail/postfix211 >> - mail/postfix-current (3.0.4) -> mail/postfix >> - postfix-current will be updated to 3.1.0 (released this week) >> >> In some weeks 3.1.x will become the default postfix, and 3.0.x >> will be removed from the tree, postfix211 will stay as the last >> postfix 2.x releases and current will become again current. >> There are some users using VDA patches, only available for >> postfix 2.8 but it also works on 2.11, there is no support from >> the VDA project for 3.x and it seems the VDA project is no longer >> alive. > > >> On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:29:43 -0800 (PST), Roger Marquis stated: >>> 3.2 is an experimental release. >>> It would be misleading to label it current. > >On 2016-02-26 20:32, Carmel wrote: >> The experimental version of Postfix has been labeled >> "postfix-current" for as long as I can remember. To change it now >> would really confuse some users. > > >This was indeed the case (postfix-current == "The experimental" >(development) version) a few years back. It was kept closely >up-to-date with the latest development release. I lived under >impression that it still is supposed to be so (but just happen >to be lagging a bit) - but apparently this is no longer so. > >I wish the postfix-current would track the latest development release >as it used to do. It made it possible for FreeBSD users to more >fruitfully contribute back to the project by quickly responding >to new features and potential problems. > >If this is deemed unsuitable, then there should be a new port >mail/postfix-devel to track the latest releases (although then >I don't know to what purpose a postfix-current would serve). > > Mark \mail\postfix-XXX Older versions of Postfix \mail\postfix-stableLatest stable version of Postfix \mail\postfix-current Experimental version of Postfix As each "experimental" becomes stable, it is given a "postfix-stable" designation and the old stable release is given a "postfix-XXX" designation. The new postfix experimental release then assumes the "postfix-current" title. My only concern with changing the name "postfix-current" to "postfix-devel" or whatever is for historical purposes. I have always known it by the latter designations plus I am not sure if it would cause a problem in the ports system if it were to be renamed. In any case, the "postfix" ports were always kept up-to-date in virtual real time. Now they seem to lag behind. I am unsure as to what has happened. -- Carmel -- Carmel ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
|Obviously, the ports are not in sync with the current Stable and |Experimental branches of Postfix. Olli Hauer wrote: No they are not and I plan the following to let users some time for the transition to 3.1. - mail/postfix (2.11.7) -> mail/postfix211 - mail/postfix-current (3.0.4) -> mail/postfix - postfix-current will be updated to 3.1.0 (released this week) In some weeks 3.1.x will become the default postfix, and 3.0.x will be removed from the tree, postfix211 will stay as the last postfix 2.x releases and current will become again current. There are some users using VDA patches, only available for postfix 2.8 but it also works on 2.11, there is no support from the VDA project for 3.x and it seems the VDA project is no longer alive. On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:29:43 -0800 (PST), Roger Marquis stated: 3.2 is an experimental release. It would be misleading to label it current. On 2016-02-26 20:32, Carmel wrote: The experimental version of Postfix has been labeled "postfix-current" for as long as I can remember. To change it now would really confuse some users. This was indeed the case (postfix-current == "The experimental" (development) version) a few years back. It was kept closely up-to-date with the latest development release. I lived under impression that it still is supposed to be so (but just happen to be lagging a bit) - but apparently this is no longer so. I wish the postfix-current would track the latest development release as it used to do. It made it possible for FreeBSD users to more fruitfully contribute back to the project by quickly responding to new features and potential problems. If this is deemed unsuitable, then there should be a new port mail/postfix-devel to track the latest releases (although then I don't know to what purpose a postfix-current would serve). Mark ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:29:43 -0800 (PST), Roger Marquis stated: >3.2 is an experimental release. It would be misleading to label it >current. The experimental version of Postfix has been labeled "postfix-current" for as long as I can remember. To change it now would really confuse some users. -- Carmel ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
On 02/26/16 17:29, Roger Marquis wrote: > While we're on the subject of Postfix, has anyone tried submitting a > patch to remove the unnecessary perl5 build dependency? We don't install > perl to our smtp jails so always do this but it seems odd the maintainer > still requires such a heavyweight build-dep for a lightweight one-line > regex. If you're interested in keeping your smtp jails as frugal as possible, I strongly recommend setting up a package build server and installing from your own pkg repo. As perl is only a BUILD_DEPENDS[*] it shouldn't trouble you in this scenario. Plus installing from binary packages involves much less downtime and risk to your frontline services. The perl requirement in postfix appears to be about building man pages -- it's from upstream, rather than something arbitrarily added in the port Makefile. In fact, all that the port Makefile does is modify the postfix build infrastructure so it can find perl in the usual location it gets installed on FreeBSD. Cheers, Matthew signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
On Feb 26 18:48, olli hauer wrote: In some weeks 3.1.x will become the default postfix, and 3.0.x will be removed from the tree, postfix211 will stay as the last postfix 2.x releases and current will become again current. There are some users using VDA patches, only available for postfix 2.8 but it also works on 2.11, there is no support from the VDA project for 3.x and it seems the VDA project is no longer alive. I saw this in the updates that you made yesterday, thanks! However it looks like VDA is still in the Makefile for postfix-current which seems weird if you say that you have removed VDA support? -- Matt ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
On 2016-02-26 14:45, Carmel wrote: > On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 14:26:56 +0100, Guido Falsi stated: > >> On 02/26/16 14:16, Mark Martinec wrote: >>> In ports we have: >>> mail/postfix-current 2.11.7 >>> mail/postfix 2.8.0 >> >> Your information is outdated: >> >>> grep PORTVERSION /usr/ports/mail/postfix/Makefile >> PORTVERSION=2.11.7 >> >> (you can also check http://www.freshports.org/mail/postfix/ ) >> >> Are you upgrading your ports tree regularly? > > Postfix 3.1 stable release > Postfix 3.2 experimental release > > Port: postfix-2.11.7_1,1 > Path: /usr/ports/mail/postfix > Info: Secure alternative to widely-used Sendmail > > Port: postfix-current-3.0.20151003_1,4 > Path: /usr/ports/mail/postfix-current > Info: Secure alternative to widely-used Sendmail => since yesterday evening it is 3.0-20160204 but if you look at the DISTNAME you will see it is 3.0.4 > Obviously, the ports are not in sync with the current Stable and > Experimental branches of Postfix. No they are not and I plan the following to let users some time for the transition to 3.1. - mail/postfix (2.11.7) -> mail/postfix211 - mail/postfix-current (3.0.4) -> mail/postfix - postfix-current will be updated to 3.1.0 (released this week) In some weeks 3.1.x will become the default postfix, and 3.0.x will be removed from the tree, postfix211 will stay as the last postfix 2.x releases and current will become again current. There are some users using VDA patches, only available for postfix 2.8 but it also works on 2.11, there is no support from the VDA project for 3.x and it seems the VDA project is no longer alive. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
In ports we have: mail/postfix-current 2.11.7 mail/postfix 2.8.0 The version in mail/postfix-current is just barely still supported, "barely still supported" is not accurate. 2.11 is still the most common implementation by a good margin. Wietse recognizes this which is why he has always offered excellent long-term support of popular releases and why 2.10, 2.11 and 3.0 are all still fully supported. You're right about 2.8 however, this should be deprecated and marked as such by 'pkg audit'. The current situation is most unfortunate, as some ports (like mail/mailman) insist in their dependency on mail/postfix, which has (among others) no support for internationalized e-mail addresses, and is no longer supported upstream. In practice this is a non-issue given the still experimental nature of internationalized email addresses, the lack of mature translating rules or parsing libraries, the security implications, the fact that nobody is using them and the very real likelihood that they will never become viable (not entirely unlike ICANN's other poorly thought out and even more poorly implemented "any TLD" scheme, as in any TLD you're wiling to pay us big bucks for). OTOH Postfix 3 does have other important features that make it worth upgrading to. It would be appreciated if both ports were updated. Preferably mail/postfix to 3.1 and mail/postfix-current to 3.2, 3.2 is an experimental release. It would be misleading to label it current. or at least: mail/postfix to 2.11 and mail/postfix-current to 3.1. Agreed. While we're on the subject of Postfix, has anyone tried submitting a patch to remove the unnecessary perl5 build dependency? We don't install perl to our smtp jails so always do this but it seems odd the maintainer still requires such a heavyweight build-dep for a lightweight one-line regex. Roger ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
On 2016-02-26 14:16, Mark Martinec wrote:
> In ports we have:
> mail/postfix-current 2.11.7
> mail/postfix 2.8.0
>
> The version in mail/postfix-current is just barely still supported,
> the version in mail/postfix is no longer supported upstream.
>
> Upstream versions are labeled as:
> - Postfix 3.2 is an experimental release
> - Postfix 3.1 is a stable release
> - past stable releases (still supported): 3.0, 2.11, 2.10
> - no longer supported stable releases:
> Postfix 2.9 (Final update: October 2015)
> Postfix 2.8 (Final update: February 2015)
>
> The current situation is most unfortunate, as some ports
> (like mail/mailman) insist in their dependency on mail/postfix,
> which has (among others) no support for internationalized
> e-mail addresses, and is no longer supported upstream.
>
> It would be appreciated if both ports were updated.
> Preferably mail/postfix to 3.1 and mail/postfix-current to 3.2,
> or at least: mail/postfix to 2.11 and mail/postfix-current to 3.1.
>
> Mark
Non of the users and groups postfix installs are referenced in the mailman
configure args, only an extra patch is applied and the MTA is set to "Postfix".
I suspect and will bet, mailman would also build and run fine with the
following patch, and then users are free to change the postfix release without
dependency changes.
Index: Makefile
===
--- Makefile(revision 409613)
+++ Makefile(working copy)
@@ -94,8 +94,6 @@
.endif
.if ${PORT_OPTIONS:MPOSTFIX}
-BUILD_DEPENDS+=postfix:${PORTSDIR}/mail/postfix
-RUN_DEPENDS+= postfix:${PORTSDIR}/mail/postfix
MAIL_GID?= mailman
EXTRA_PATCHES+=${FILESDIR}/postfix-verp.diff
.endif
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
On 02/26/16 14:51, Mark Martinec wrote: > On 2016-02-26 14:26, Guido Falsi wrote: >> On 02/26/16 14:16, Mark Martinec wrote: >>> In ports we have: >>> mail/postfix-current 2.11.7 >>> mail/postfix 2.8.0 >> >> Your information is outdated: >> >>> grep PORTVERSION /usr/ports/mail/postfix/Makefile >> PORTVERSION=2.11.7 >> >> (you can also check http://www.freshports.org/mail/postfix/ ) >> >> Are you upgrading your ports tree regularly? > > Apology, got versions wrong (looked at a wrong location). > > Nevertheless, my original problem remains: > can't have both the mailman and postfix 3.* at the same time: I think the mailman problem is caused by a dependency thing. The mailman port depends on mail/postfix. You could locally modify the port and build your own package as a workaround. You can add an option to the mailman port to depend on postfix-devel. If you'd like thee postfix port to be updated your best bet is sending a patch through bugzilla. -- Guido Falsi ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
On 2016-02-26 14:26, Guido Falsi wrote: On 02/26/16 14:16, Mark Martinec wrote: In ports we have: mail/postfix-current 2.11.7 mail/postfix 2.8.0 Your information is outdated: grep PORTVERSION /usr/ports/mail/postfix/Makefile PORTVERSION=2.11.7 (you can also check http://www.freshports.org/mail/postfix/ ) Are you upgrading your ports tree regularly? Apology, got versions wrong (looked at a wrong location). Nevertheless, my original problem remains: can't have both the mailman and postfix 3.* at the same time: # pkg install mailman The following 3 package(s) will be affected (of 0 checked): Installed packages to be REMOVED: postfix-current-3.0.20151003_1,4 New packages to be INSTALLED: mailman: 2.1.20_2 postfix: 2.11.7_2,1 Mark ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 14:26:56 +0100, Guido Falsi stated: >On 02/26/16 14:16, Mark Martinec wrote: >> In ports we have: >> mail/postfix-current 2.11.7 >> mail/postfix 2.8.0 > >Your information is outdated: > >> grep PORTVERSION /usr/ports/mail/postfix/Makefile >PORTVERSION=2.11.7 > >(you can also check http://www.freshports.org/mail/postfix/ ) > >Are you upgrading your ports tree regularly? Postfix 3.1 stable release Postfix 3.2 experimental release Port: postfix-2.11.7_1,1 Path: /usr/ports/mail/postfix Info: Secure alternative to widely-used Sendmail Port: postfix-current-3.0.20151003_1,4 Path: /usr/ports/mail/postfix-current Info: Secure alternative to widely-used Sendmail Obviously, the ports are not in sync with the current Stable and Experimental branches of Postfix. -- Carmel ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
On 02/26/16 14:16, Mark Martinec wrote: > In ports we have: > mail/postfix-current 2.11.7 > mail/postfix 2.8.0 Your information is outdated: > grep PORTVERSION /usr/ports/mail/postfix/Makefile PORTVERSION=2.11.7 (you can also check http://www.freshports.org/mail/postfix/ ) Are you upgrading your ports tree regularly? -- Guido Falsi ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
mail/postfix and mail/postfix-current need upgrading
In ports we have: mail/postfix-current 2.11.7 mail/postfix 2.8.0 The version in mail/postfix-current is just barely still supported, the version in mail/postfix is no longer supported upstream. Upstream versions are labeled as: - Postfix 3.2 is an experimental release - Postfix 3.1 is a stable release - past stable releases (still supported): 3.0, 2.11, 2.10 - no longer supported stable releases: Postfix 2.9 (Final update: October 2015) Postfix 2.8 (Final update: February 2015) The current situation is most unfortunate, as some ports (like mail/mailman) insist in their dependency on mail/postfix, which has (among others) no support for internationalized e-mail addresses, and is no longer supported upstream. It would be appreciated if both ports were updated. Preferably mail/postfix to 3.1 and mail/postfix-current to 3.2, or at least: mail/postfix to 2.11 and mail/postfix-current to 3.1. Mark ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
