On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 07:24:38AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Martin Quinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > severity 397285 normal
> > retitle  397285 FTBFS on misconfigured chroots
> > merge 395482, 397285, 393985
> > thanks
> >
> > Hey dudes,
> >
> > could you please check the existing bugs before submitting a third time the
> > same bug ? In the meanwhile, I'll try to find the time to apply the patch
> > from Goswin on the package and see if that helps. But I'll get a third kid
> > in 2 weeks so I cannot promise.
> >
> > Moreover, since this bug is not RC but only normal (it only appears on
> > misconfigured chroots where mailname is not configured), I'm not sure it's
> > still ok to upload a modified version. I should check with release team, and
> > lacked time to do so so far.
> >
> > For the record, I uploaded a suposly fixed version a while ago, but my patch
> > was not good enough. I hope that Goswin's is.
> >
> > Bye, Mt.
> 
> What exactly needs to be configured?
> 
> # cat /etc/mailname 
> ql-dev
> # cat /proc/sys/kernel/hostname 
> ql-dev

Have a look at /usr/share/quilt/mail:

if [ -z "$opt_sender" ]; then
        hostname=nowhere
        if [ -e /etc/mailname ] ; 
        then
                hostname=`cat /etc/mailname`
        fi
        
        if [ "$hostname" = "${hostname/.}" ]
        then
                hostname=$(hostname -f 2>/dev/null)
        fi
        
        if [ "$hostname" = "${hostname/.}" ]
        then
                hostname=$(hostname)
        fi
        opt_sender="${LOGNAME:-$(whoami)[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
        case "$opt_sender" in
        [EMAIL PROTECTED])      ;;
        *)
                echo $"\
Could not determine the envelope sender address. Please use --sender." >&2
                exit 1
                ;;
        esac
fi
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

According to upstream, valid email addresses have a dot in the right part.

use something like foo.com as mailname, not foo alone.

Bye, Mt.

-- 
I had a headache just by looking at the data structures of your linear-time 
optimal algorithm. No doubt an exhaustive algorithm would be more efficient in
practice. -- Bastard Reviewer From the Hell

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to