Bug 59691 - ebuild for postgrey 1.17 (Postgrey - Postfix Greylisting Policy Server)
|
Bug#:
59691
|
Product: Gentoo Linux
|
Version: unspecified
|
Platform: All
|
|
OS/Version: Linux
|
Status: RESOLVED
|
Severity: enhancement
|
Priority: P2
|
|
Resolution: FIXED
|
Assigned To: net-mail@gentoo.org
|
Reported By: steeeeeveee@gmx.net
|
|
Component: Ebuilds
|
|
|
URL:
|
|
Summary: ebuild for postgrey 1.17 (Postgrey - Postfix Greylisting Policy Server)
|
|
Keywords:
|
|
Status Whiteboard:
|
|
Opened: 2004-08-07 06:25 0000
|
sorry! have made a typo for one file. anyway... to install do:
mkdir -p /usr/local/portage/mail-filter/postgrey/files
-- copy postgrey-1.14.ebuild to /usr/local/portage/mail-filter/postgrey
-- copy postgrey.conf to /usr/local/portage/mail-filter/postgrey/files
-- copy postgrey.rc to /usr/local/portage/mail-filter/postgrey/files
ebuild /usr/local/portage/mail-filter/postgrey/postgrey-1.14 digest
then enable portage overlay directory and install postgrey ;)
cheers
SteveB
SteveB, do you have a good howto for greylisting other than in the package
itself? I want to test it first.
There is a howto at http://home.coming.dk/amavis.html, which includes postgrey.
I'm using it on my main mail server for quite some time now, and it helps to
cut the load to SA quite down a bit :)
Tuan pointed me to this. Here go some comments and questions:
Dependencies according to postgrey homepage:
Perl (version ≥ 5.6.0)
Net::Server
IO::Multiplex
BerkeleyDB (Perl module)
Berkeley DB (Library, version ≥ 4.1)
Any reason for specific versions in the attached ebuild?
>=dev-perl/net-server-0.85
>=dev-perl/IO-Multiplex-1.08
>=dev-perl/BerkeleyDB-0.25
Any reason for creating /etc/postfix this should be handled by Postfix?
# postgrey data in /etc/postfix
dodir /etc/postfix
keepdir /etc/postfix
insinto /etc/postfix
Like wise with /etc/conf.d?
# postgrey config for gentoo
dodir /etc/conf.d
keepdir /etc/conf.d
insinto /etc/conf.d
On the postive side this ebuild seems to be more userfriendly with configuration . I'm a bit short on time now so I have't actually tested it yet but will do so later.
Created an attachment (id=50651) [details]
postgrey-1.17-r3.ebuild
To: Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen (Comment #16):
I am just to carefull ;) Anyway... I took out the additional creation of
/etc/postfix, /etc/init.d and /etc/conf.d
The versioning of the 3 packages you mentioned are gone as well. And I added
the creation of /etc/postfix/postgrey_whitelist_clients.local (if it does not
exist. Since this is the best place to add your own servers into).
cheers
Steve
Ok, got a bit more time to check out this one. Comments follow:
SRC_URI also seems to differ from the official download link. Any reason?
enewuser, enewgroup, newins, newexe, dosbin transparently handles error conditions and ${S} always exist. At least many ebuilds use them without catching errors.
I don't think the empty src_compile is needed.
SLOT="0" is missing.
In pkg_postinst do s/durig/during/
Also I think the einfo is too long. I guess users should know how to add postgrey to a run level and perhaps point users to a doc file describing the whitelist syntax.
Still not actively tested though.
Created an attachment (id=50989) [details]
postgrey-1.17-r4.ebuild
SRC_URI is not diffrend then the original download link. I only included a link
to the /tools/postgrey/pub/old directory, because if the ebuild would stay long
in portage and postgrey would get updated then the ebuild could still download
the tar.gz file from the /old directory. That's all.
About the transparent handling of errors: I am just to carefull. That's all.
The empty src_compile: Same as with the transparent error handling.
SLOT: Yes! It is missing. Sorry ;)
About the einfo: I know that it is long. I made it shorter now.
cheers
SteveB
The ebuild looks like it works for 1.21 without changes (I haven't tested
functionality of installed postgrey yet).
Some questions though - why do you handle whitelist files installing so
awkwardly?
Also, where are whitelist .local files coming from? Your ebuild tries to
install them from portage's temp. directory for postgrey ($T), but how do they
get there?
Ok, it seems to work, but there's a missing runtime dep - dev-perl/Net-DNS.
postgreyreport needs it.
Ok, postgrey-1.21 ebuild is in portage, based on latest attachment here, with
some modifications.
Thanks a lot.
Thank you Andrej!
If you have some time, then please have a look at SQLgrey ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71535 ). It is another Greylisting service, but it uses SQL to store the data.
I would be very happy if you could have a look at it and if you could push that one to portage CVS as well.
Kind Regards
SteveB