Portage is not specific about what you name your ebuilds, so it would be feasible to create two ebuilds, ie xmail-1.21.ebuild and xmail_chroot-1.21.ebuild. The only foreseeable problem with this is if you don't unmerge the original chrooted version before installing the new chrooted version would be that you would have two ebuilds merged onto your system. This would be a simple problem to correct, using portage's package blocker detection. ie, emerge -p xmail_chroot with xmail previously installed would return # emerge --pretend xmail_chroot
These are the packages I would merge, in order Calculating dependencies ...done! [blocks B ] mail-mta/xmail (from pkg mail-mta/xmail_chroot-1.21) [ebuild N ] mail-mta/xmail_chroot-1.21 Would this be a good solution? I think it can be done, then Sergey can maintain the chroot, and Kevin or whoever wants to can maintain the standard. I do, however like the Gentoo file structure, which doesn't veer too far from the documentation, merely replacing $MAIL_ROOT = /var/MailRoot with $MAIL_ROOT = /etc/xmail. I did remove the symlink into /home/xmail as that merely confused me :D Dustin C. Hatch http://www.dchweb.com Kevin Williams wrote: >When I introduced the XMail Server ebuild to Gentoo, I tried to achieve >the same resulting install that one would have if following the >Readme.html document. This way, the documentation would match one's file >system. Also, since it was new to Gentoo, I thought following the >documentation would be a Good Idea. > >I don't prefer non-chroot over chroot. I think a chroot-ed server that >doesn't match the distributed documentation is a poor choice for an >audience of users who likely have never used the server before. Davide >specifically addresses his choice of permissions and file locations in >the documentation, and I don't believe his setup is any less secure than >he claims. > >I also don't agree that the ebuild should do the chroot for you. Most >other servers in Gentoo don't do that. That is a server setup left to >the skills of dedicated administrators. I wouldn't mind having two >ebuilds in Gentoo, as long as it's clear which is which. The >documentation would have to be changed or appended for the chroot-ed >version, too. > >QuinoX wrote: > > >>1) If I may ask, why do you prefer nonchroot over chroot ? >>2) If you add a nonchrooted version to portage, will that make my server >>nonchrooted too if I use that ebuild to update? If it does, I guess some >>people will not like that (myself included) >> >>Kevin Williams schrieb: >> >> >> >> >>>Feel free to update that ebuild and use it however you like. >>> >>>Dustin C. Hatch wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>Has someone created an ebuild for 1.21 yet? If not, I will create it >>>>and submit it to gentoo's bugzilla. Kevin, is it alright if I update >>>>the ebuild you sent me? I prefer it to the chrooted version. >>>> >>>>Dustin C. Hatch >>>>http://www.dchweb.com/ >>>> >>>>Davide Libenzi wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>1.21 it is, at the end: >>>>> >>>>>http://www.xmailserver.org >>>>> >>>>>*snip impressive list of changes snip* >>>>> >>>>>- Davide >>>>> >>>>>- >>>>>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in >>>>>the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to >>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>- >>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in >>the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> > >---------- >Scanned for viruses by ClamAV >- >To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in >the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
