On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 02:54:39PM -0800, Krishna `Shamu' Sethuraman wrote:
> Package: uw-imapd
> Version: 7:2002edebian1-6
> Severity: serious
> Justification: Policy 10.7.3
> 
> 
> Ref also bug 190314 .  Sorry if the Justification tag is wrong, but I
> suspect it's related to that section.  uw-imapd-ssl.postinst under sarge
> clobbers my sysadmin's /etc/inetd.conf line:
> 
> #imaps  stream  tcp     nowait  root    /usr/sbin/tcpd /usr/sbin/imapd
> # Removed tcpd from imaps so I can limit imapd to localhost for webmail
> imaps   stream  tcp     nowait  root    /usr/sbin/imapd
> 
> This last upgrade changed the imaps line to:
> 
> imaps   stream  tcp     nowait  root    /usr/sbin/tcpd /usr/sbin/imapd
> 
> possibly as a result of DEBIAN/postinst:
>  
>  in `echo "$RET" | sed 's/,/ /g'`; do
>  ...
>        elif [ "$i" = "imaps" ]; then
>     update-inetd --group mail --add "imaps  stream  tcp nowait  root    
> /usr/sbin/tcpd /usr/sbin/imapd";
>         fi
> done

  I'll give it a try, but the fault here is not uw-impad one but
update-inedtd.

  looking at update-inted(8) I see :

  --add ENTRY
      Add  an  entry  to  /etc/inetd.conf .  A description of the ENTRY
      format can be found in  the  inetd(8)  or  inetd.conf(5)  manual
      pages (or just look at the /etc/services file).  In order to pre-
      vent the shell from changing your ENTRY definition you  have  to
      quote  the ENTRY using single or double quotes.  You can use tabs
      (the tab character or \t) and spaces to separate the  fields  of
      the  ENTRY.   To  add  the  ENTRY  to  a  specific section in the
      /etc/inetd.conf file please use the --group option in addtion to
      the --add option.

      If  you  are trying to add an entry which already exists update-
      inetd won't add the entry.  For uncommented entries  it  will  do
      nothing  and  for entries that are commented out by the comment-
      chars (see option --comment-chars ) it will enable the  existing
      entry.   If  you  want to completely replace an entry just remove
      the entry with the --remove option first.


  So i guess the problems here is that he encountered the first
commented line, un commentend it or sth like that.

  I'll investigate further.
-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Reply via email to