I tried the patch as manual but I could not patch it. Because I got en error
as below;

make qmail-smtpd
./compile qmail-smtpd.c
qmail-smtpd.c: In function `main':
qmail-smtpd.c:728: warning: return type of 'main' is not `int'
./compile policy.c `head -1 conf-policy`
policy.c:1264: error: redefinition of `struct __policy_'
policy.c:1270: error: redefinition of typedef 'policy_t'
policy.c:60: error: previous declaration of 'policy_t' was here
policy.c:1276: error: redefinition of `struct __local_'
policy.c:1281: error: redefinition of typedef 'local_t'
policy.c:71: error: previous declaration of 'local_t' was here
policy.c:1287: error: redefinition of `struct __domain_'
policy.c:1293: error: redefinition of typedef 'domain_t'
policy.c:83: error: previous declaration of 'domain_t' was here
policy.c:1315: error: redefinition of 'domains'
policy.c:105: error: previous definition of 'domains' was here
policy.c:1315: error: redefinition of 's_domain'
policy.c:105: error: previous definition of 's_domain' was here
policy.c:1315: error: redefinition of 'r_domain'
policy.c:105: error: previous definition of 'r_domain' was here
policy.c:1322: error: redefinition of 'policy_check'
policy.c:112: error: previous definition of 'policy_check' was here
policy.c:1432: error: redefinition of 'policy_load'
policy.c:222: error: previous definition of 'policy_load' was here
policy.c:1511: error: redefinition of 'policy_parse'
policy.c:301: error: previous definition of 'policy_parse' was here
policy.c:1719: error: redefinition of 'policy_construct'
policy.c:509: error: previous definition of 'policy_construct' was here
policy.c:1829: error: redefinition of 'policy_construct_parse_arguments'
policy.c:619: error: previous definition of
'policy_construct_parse_arguments' was here
policy.c:1899: error: redefinition of 'policy_match'
policy.c:689: error: previous definition of 'policy_match' was here
policy.c:1951: error: redefinition of 'policy_applies_to'
policy.c:741: error: previous definition of 'policy_applies_to' was here
policy.c:1991: error: redefinition of 'policy_flags'
policy.c:781: error: previous definition of 'policy_flags' was here
policy.c:2039: error: redefinition of 'policy_find'
policy.c:829: error: previous definition of 'policy_find' was here
policy.c:2054: error: redefinition of 'policy_forbids'
policy.c:844: error: previous definition of 'policy_forbids' was here
policy.c:2297: error: redefinition of 'domain_find'
policy.c:1087: error: previous definition of 'domain_find' was here
policy.c:2316: error: redefinition of 'local_find'
policy.c:1106: error: previous definition of 'local_find' was here
policy.c:2337: error: redefinition of 'policy_free'
policy.c:1127: error: previous definition of 'policy_free' was here
policy.c:2371: error: redefinition of 'local_free'
policy.c:1161: error: previous definition of 'local_free' was here
policy.c:2398: error: redefinition of 'domains_free'
policy.c:1188: error: previous definition of 'domains_free' was here
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/local/qmail-source/qmail-1.03.

I installed qmail as qmail-1.03. I hadn't used netqmail-1.05.
does this condition cause that problem?


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Remo Mattei" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <vchkpw@inter7.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: [vchkpw] How can I personalize some users in a domain ?


> apply the patch manually.
>
> Remo
>
> Bulent wrote:
> > I downloaded  empf-toaster-0.8.1.patch
> >
> > as below I tried patch it . But I got an error one line as below;
> > Hunk #2 failed at 371.
> > 1 out of 2 hunks failed--saving rejects to qmail-smtpd.c.rej
> >
> > What shall I do ?
> >
> > Here is the patch operation:
> >
> > mailserver# patch < empf-toaster-0.8.1.patch
> > Hmm...  Looks like a unified diff to me...
> > The text leading up to this was:
> > --------------------------
> > |--- qmail-smtpd.c      2006-06-19 12:43:14.000000000 -0300
> > |+++ ../netqmail-1.05-new/qmail-smtpd.c 2006-06-19 16:33:20.000000000 -0
300
> > --------------------------
> > Patching file qmail-smtpd.c using Plan A...
> > Hunk #1 succeeded at 336 with fuzz 2 (offset -271 lines).
> > Hunk #2 failed at 371.
> > 1 out of 2 hunks failed--saving rejects to qmail-smtpd.c.rej
> > Hmm...  The next patch looks like a unified diff to me...
> > The text leading up to this was:
> > --------------------------
> > |--- Makefile   2006-06-19 12:43:14.000000000 -0300
> > |+++ ../netqmail-1.05-new/Makefile      2006-06-19
16:37:44.000000000 -0300
> > --------------------------
> > Patching file Makefile using Plan A...
> > Hunk #1 failed at 1663.
> > 1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to Makefile.rej
> > Hmm...  The next patch looks like a unified diff to me...
> > The text leading up to this was:
> > --------------------------
> > |--- conf-policy        2006-06-19 16:46:43.000000000 -0300
> > |+++ ../netqmail-1.05-new/conf-policy   2006-06-19
16:36:55.000000000 -0300
> > --------------------------
> > Patching file conf-policy using Plan A...
> > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1.
> > Hmm...  The next patch looks like a unified diff to me...
> > The text leading up to this was:
> > --------------------------
> > |--- policy.c   2006-06-19 16:48:11.000000000 -0300
> > |+++ ../netqmail-1.05-new/policy.c      2006-06-19
16:37:01.000000000 -0300
> > --------------------------
> > Patching file policy.c using Plan A...
> > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1.
> > Hmm...  The next patch looks like a unified diff to me...
> > The text leading up to this was:
> > --------------------------
> > |--- policy.h   2006-06-19 16:48:14.000000000 -0300
> > |+++ ../netqmail-1.05-new/policy.h      2006-06-19
16:37:05.000000000 -0300
> > --------------------------
> > Patching file policy.h using Plan A...
> > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1.
> > done
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Ken Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <vchkpw@inter7.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 6:47 PM
> > Subject: Re: [vchkpw] How can I personalize some users in a domain ?
> >
> >
> >
> > domain. Let me explain that case.
> >
> > and receive any mail from anywhere except that domain.
> >
> > email from everywhere.
> >
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to