Bug 63123 - net-analyzer/nagios-core* needs virtual/mailx changed to virtual/mta
Bug#: 63123 Product:  Gentoo Linux Version: 2004.2 Platform: All
OS/Version: All Status: RESOLVED Severity: normal Priority: P2
Resolution: FIXED Assigned To: net-mail@gentoo.org Reported By: ramereth@gentoo.org
Component: Applications
URL: 
Summary: net-analyzer/nagios-core* needs virtual/mailx changed to virtual/mta
Keywords:  
Status Whiteboard: 
Opened: 2004-09-07 06:22 0000
Description:   Opened: 2004-09-07 06:22 0000
When I tried doing an emerge -UDpv world today, nagios-core broke something:

samwise root # emerge -UDpv world
>>> --upgradeonly implies --update... adding --update to options.

These are the packages that I would merge, in order:

Calculating world dependencies |
emerge: there are no masked or unmasked ebuilds to satisfy "virtual/mailx".

!!! Problem with ebuild net-analyzer/nagios-1.2
!!! Possibly a DEPEND/*DEPEND problem.

!!! Depgraph creation failed.


Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the new virtual for mail apps virtual/mta now and not virtual/mailx ? When I changed the ebuild from mailx to mta, the depgraph completed fine. 

Cheers!

------- Comment #1 From Martin Holzer (RETIRED) 2004-09-07 06:56:34 0000 -------
no, it has to be mailx to send mails, no local mta is needed
just upgrade your mailx mailer.

------- Comment #2 From Lance Albertson 2004-09-07 07:03:44 0000 -------
Hrm, maybe that's the problem. This box has an mta (postfix) and it was
complaining about this. Once I changed it to virtual/mta it fixed the problem.
What would be causing this?

------- Comment #3 From Martin Holzer (RETIRED) 2004-09-07 07:10:28 0000 -------
a mta is not really required, but it's nice to have one
only the "mail" command is need, which is providen by eg mailx

you can test it with #echo "test" | mail root
if the message gets delivered with a local procmail or with a mta on another machine is independend.

------- Comment #4 From Lance Albertson 2004-09-07 07:20:17 0000 -------
Yeah, But what I'm saying is, shouldn't postfix satisfy the mailx virtual? Or
how should it work? I just upgraded postfix on this box last week, maybe this
isn't a bug with nagios-core, but one with postfix itself. The key issue here
is that I have an mta installed on this machine (postfix) and its complaining
that I have nothing to satisfy mailx. This gets bypassed by changing
virtual/mailx to virtual/mta. I understand that it doesn't need an mta :) as
ssmtp should work fine if configured correctly. 

------- Comment #5 From Jon Hood (RETIRED) 2004-09-11 08:08:35 0000 -------
net-mail herd please look at this:

$ grep virtual/mailx * -r
nail/nail-10.8.ebuild:PROVIDE="virtual/mailx"
nail/nail-10.8.ebuild:  !virtual/mailx"

Why is mail-client/mailx not providing virtual/mailx? Something looks wrong here...

------- Comment #6 From Grant Goodyear 2004-09-13 08:34:58 0000 -------
mail-client/mailx is, indeed, missing the mailx PROVIDE.

It's an easy fix, but I'm away from my Gentoo machine atm.  Can somebody in
net-mail fix this?

------- Comment #7 From Andrej Kacian (RETIRED) 2004-09-13 10:17:14 0000 -------
Fixed in mailx-8.1.2.20021129-r4.ebuild, now in CVS.

------- Comment #8 From Andrej Kacian (RETIRED) 2004-09-13 10:48:48 0000 -------
We need to mark mailx-8.1.2.20021129-r4.ebuild stable on ppc, sparc, alpha,
hppa and ppc64, so the original bug can go away on stable systems. Thank you,
guys.

------- Comment #9 From Gustavo Zacarias (RETIRED) 2004-09-13 11:16:24 0000 -------
sparc happy.

------- Comment #10 From Guy Martin 2004-09-14 08:30:50 0000 -------
Stable on hppa.

------- Comment #11 From Bryan Østergaard (RETIRED) 2004-09-19 14:47:22 0000 -------
Stable on alpha.

------- Comment #12 From Pieter Van den Abeele 2004-09-22 15:20:15 0000 -------
stable on ppc

------- Comment #13 From Andrej Kacian (RETIRED) 2004-10-01 15:19:28 0000 -------
Lowering severity

------- Comment #14 From Tom Gall 2004-10-09 16:21:28 0000 -------
stable on ppc64

------- Comment #15 From Andrej Kacian (RETIRED) 2004-10-10 10:44:29 0000 -------
Stable on all required archs, closing. Thanks everyone (even though you're not
on CC anymore :) ).

------- Comment #16 From Max Michaels 2004-12-07 08:54:18 0000 -------
did anyone add this to portage? If not, why?