Stuart Henderson wrote:
> i've just committed a modified version.
thanks.
> it would be better if smtpd's sendmail(8) interface was compatible with
> traditional behaviour really.
Ideally, yes, but I don't think it's practical. It is not a simple patch
by any means. Postfix implements `sendmail
on the topic of alpine, any chance to merge the below patch?
It restores an OOTB functioning alpine upon fresh port installation.
alpine broke when smtpd(8) was merged into base and made the default
MTA. smtpd(8) does not support nor reject the -bs flag when invoked
as `sendmail` (this is hard co
tech@ to prevent
future concealment of anomalous behavior.
Regards
Lloyd
Lloyd wrote:
> There is a bug in Alpine whereby out of the box it is unable to send email on
> an OpenBSD box, even locally. By default, sending a message in unconfigured
> Alpine will fork out to sendmail(8) which
ine.conf in the Alpine port using the patch I
provided so Alpine prefers to connect to the local smtpd over TCP
2. I will be submitting a patch against smtpctl so passing -bs errors out
so this doesn't happen again.
Regards
Lloyd
[2] = "-odb"
[3] = "-oem"
18856 ktrace RET ktrace 0
18856 ktrace CALL execve(0x77fb458a4f7f,0x77fb458a4e18,0x77fb458a4e30)
18856 ktrace NAMI "/usr/sbin/send-mail"
18856 ktrace ARGS
[0] = "/usr/sbin/send-mail"
[1] = "-t
tible.
On Tuesday, April 29th, 2025, Lucas Gabriel Vuotto wrote:
> Hey Lloyd,
>
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 02:00:17AM +, Lloyd wrote:
>
> > There is a bug in Alpine whereby out of the box it is unable to send email
> > on
> > an OpenBSD box, even locally. By de
There is a bug in Alpine whereby out of the box it is unable to send email on
an OpenBSD box, even locally. By default, sending a message in unconfigured
Alpine will fork out to sendmail(8) which hangs for some unknown reason and
the sendmail wrapper process needs to be killed. Receiving mail works
Hello ports@
The use of fwmark in net/wireguard-tools wg(8) appears to be broken. I believe
this is because this fwmark is a Linux-specific convention for use with
their netfilter API. E.g. an error is returned if the fwmark argument is
supplied:
# wg set wg0 fwmark 1234
Unable to modify interfac
Stuart Henderson wrote:
> I think this makes sense, but don't use alpine myself. Is there anyrhing
> users need to be aware of (i.e. do they need to do anything to adapt to
> it) or is it seamless?
Only change users will notice is the following message no longer appears:
[Folder vulnerable - dir
Patch for alpine to use lockspool(1) for proper mailbox locking and
eliminate warning messages on startup. Tested on 7.6/amd64. Full credit
for this patch goes to joe at sourceopen dot com.
ok?
Index: patches/patch-imap_src_osdep_unix_Makefile
=
inally fix this once and for all? Thanks.
Regards
Lloyd
Link to patches:
https://sourceopen.com/index.php/a-journey-with-the-alpine-mail-user-agent-mua-in-openbsd-or-how-to-safely-fix-folder-vulnerable-directory-var-mail-must-have-1777-protection/
I don't have access to arm64, sorry.
On August 1, 2019 6:56:50 p.m. PDT, Brian Callahan wrote:
>
>
>On 8/1/19 8:28 PM, j...@bitminer.ca wrote:
>> This is of course way too soon to integrate. But at least people
>> running -current can add it for themselves.
>>
>> flang and clang accept "-fopenmp"
12 matches
Mail list logo
