Re: symbolic links problem due to do-release-upgrade (postfix 3.6.4)
Hello Victor! Just by a chance I noticed this email and wanted to add a comment. 04.10.2022 02:52, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: .. Perhaps you previously had a "backports" package that uses a non-default release label, and it persisted across the upgrade... You may need to also look at the configs (IIRC) /etc/apt.d/ to see what release pins and preferences you have in place... It is nearly impossible to have such a situation from a "backports" package on a debian-like system, unless whole packages database is seriously messed up. I can guess this is true for rpm-based setups too. Each package has a list of files recorded in the installed-packages database. The packaging system can not install two versions of the same package, it removes files from one version and installs files from the other version, - all old binaries are gone, and all new binaries are installed. There's a possibility to install a package with different name - something like postfix-test for example, - but only with different files, or else the two packages will conflict with each other. But it is not how backports work, when backporting, the package name is not changed. So it is either another postfix package name (highly unlikely, there's just no need for that), a messed-up package database (also very unlikely), or a manually installed postfix over the packaged version. But there's one other possibility remains still: when the upgrade process (installing new version of a package over old version) did not complete - regardless of backports or anything. dpkg (debian package manager) extracts files from the new version in _parallel_ with already existing files. This is in order for it to be able to rollback the installation if something goes wrong. So it is possible to have files from BOTH versions. And if the upgrade fails somewhere in this condition, the package will be marked as such, in a broken state - one have to tell dpkg to either repeat and complete the upgrade procedure, or to roll it back. dpkg -i shows the state of each package in the first column. "ii" there is for correctly installed. Everything else might need attention. Sometimes the upgrade fails, and people don't notice. Thanks, /mjt Recovering a messed up system is an art. Good luck. If you can afford some down time, I'd attempt to save all user data and do a clean reinstall. The problem isn't the symlinks, it is multiple conflicting Postfix builds.
Re: symbolic links problem due to do-release-upgrade (postfix 3.6.4)
On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 08:43:18PM +, Martin wrote: > yes, I'm afraid that's true, these are the contents of that old > directory (I renamed it and put a symbolic link to the sbin directory carrying > the current executables): > root@jerakeen:/usr/libexec/postfix/sbin.OLD# find . -type f -print | > while read file; do echo -n "$file -> "; strings $file | grep > mail_version; done | grep 3. > ./oqmgr -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./fsstone -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./flush -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./tlsproxy -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./postscreen -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./bounce -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./postfix-script -> ./verify -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./smtpd -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./scache -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./showq -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./qmqpd -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./anvil -> mail_version=3.4.13 > ./spawn -> mail_version=3.4.13 The system is fairly well messed up. If by a miracle only Postfix is broken, and nothing, else, then save the config files, and fully remove all Postfix-related packages and residual executables, ... Then re-install the correct package. Perhaps you previously had a "backports" package that uses a non-default release label, and it persisted across the upgrade... You may need to also look at the configs (IIRC) /etc/apt.d/ to see what release pins and preferences you have in place... Recovering a messed up system is an art. Good luck. If you can afford some down time, I'd attempt to save all user data and do a clean reinstall. The problem isn't the symlinks, it is multiple conflicting Postfix builds. -- Viktor.
Re: symbolic links problem due to do-release-upgrade (postfix 3.6.4) - was: manually build 3.7.2 denies SASL although included in make command
Martin: > HI Wietse, > > yes, I'm afraid that's true, these are the contents of that old > directory All those binaries have mail_version=3.4.13, therefore none will work Postfix 3.6 libraries. > I assume there has been a kind of new configuration between old postfix > version and the 3.6.4 one. > > Do you have a listing of the directory /usr/libexec/postfix of a clean > install? The file names have not changed between Postfix 3.4 and Postfix 3.5. Maybe the foillowing command will bring clarity: find / -name master One of them should be from Postfix 3.6. Wietse
Re: symbolic links problem due to do-release-upgrade (postfix 3.6.4) - was: manually build 3.7.2 denies SASL although included in make command
HI Wietse, yes, I'm afraid that's true, these are the contents of that old directory (I renamed it and put a symbolic link to the sbin directory carrying the current executables): root@jerakeen:/usr/libexec/postfix/sbin.OLD# find . -type f -print | while read file; do echo -n "$file -> "; strings $file | grep mail_version; done | grep 3. ./oqmgr -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./fsstone -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./flush -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./tlsproxy -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./postscreen -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./bounce -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./postfix-script -> ./verify -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./smtpd -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./scache -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./showq -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./qmqpd -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./anvil -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./spawn -> mail_version=3.4.13 mail_version=3.4.13 ./qmgr -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./discard -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./lmtp -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./error -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./tlsmgr -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./trivial-rewrite -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./postlogd -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./virtual -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./local -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./pipe -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./postfix-wrapper -> ./nqmgr -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./proxymap -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./postmulti-script -> ./cleanup -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./pickup -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./dnsblog -> mail_version=3.4.13 ./smtp -> mail_version=3.4.13 I assume there has been a kind of new configuration between old postfix version and the 3.6.4 one. Do you have a listing of the directory /usr/libexec/postfix of a clean install? Am 03.10.2022 18:51 schrieb Wietse Venema: > Martin: > >> Hi there, I went back to the snapshot before trying to install postfix from >> source, did an apt-get install --reinstall postfix postfiy-mysql But still >> the master executable has an old version: root@jerakeen:~# objdump -T >> /usr/libexec/postfix/master | grep compat_level DO *UND* >> var_compat_level root@jerakeen:~# strings >> /usr/libexec/postfix/master | grep mail_version mail_version=3.4.13 > > What about the other exxecutables: are they also mail_version=3.4.13? > > Wietse
Re: Upgrade postfix 2.11 to 3.1
Am 03.03.2016 um 13:25 schrieb Wietse Venema: If you don't want those lines to be logged, set the parameter (relayhost, or whatever it is that needs to be kept), and set "compatibility_level = 2". thanks a lot, as I get no compatibility error/warning, I disabled now the warning by setting the compatibility_level to 2. Gruß Matthias -- "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning." -- Rich Cook
Re: Upgrade postfix 2.11 to 3.1
The upgrade to 3.1 was uneventful. I noticed you don't need to select an option for Dovecot. Nice work. As an FYI, I ran the online DROWN test without blocking SSLv2 but using the updated openssl. No DROWN issue detected. Apologies for the top post due to use of a smartphone. Original Message From: Wietse Venema Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2016 9:58 AM To: Postfix users Reply To: Postfix users Cc: Wietse Venema; u...@porcupine.org Subject: Re: Upgrade postfix 2.11 to 3.1 Matthias Fechner: > Does this mean, I do not have to modify anything in the config? > Regarding the page http://www.postfix.org/COMPATIBILITY_README.html > postfix would log explicit lines if I have to touch anything. Wietse: > If you don't want those lines to be logged, set the parameter > (relayhost, or whatever it is that needs to be kept), and set > "compatibility_level = 2". yahoogro...@lazygranch.xyz: > I hate to bug you gurus, but can you guys mention which config > file parameters go in, that is main or master. I simply don't know > postfix that well, and RTFMing requires knowing which document to > read. These parameters go in main.cf, see COMPATIBILITY_README for instructions. > I've been hesitant to upgrade to postfix 3 given that everything > is working on 2.11, but the handwriting is on the wall. I gather > you just do the upgrade and see what breaks? Nothing is supposed to break. Postfix is unlike some projects that don't give a damn about breaking other people's system. I added the compatibility level stuff so that you get to choose. Wietse
Re: Upgrade postfix 2.11 to 3.1
Matthias Fechner: > Does this mean, I do not have to modify anything in the config? > Regarding the page http://www.postfix.org/COMPATIBILITY_README.html > postfix would log explicit lines if I have to touch anything. Wietse: > If you don't want those lines to be logged, set the parameter > (relayhost, or whatever it is that needs to be kept), and set > "compatibility_level = 2". yahoogro...@lazygranch.xyz: > I hate to bug you gurus, but can you guys mention which config > file parameters go in, that is main or master. I simply don't know > postfix that well, and RTFMing requires knowing which document to > read. These parameters go in main.cf, see COMPATIBILITY_README for instructions. > I've been hesitant to upgrade to postfix 3 given that everything > is working on 2.11, but the handwriting is on the wall. I gather > you just do the upgrade and see what breaks? Nothing is supposed to break. Postfix is unlike some projects that don't give a damn about breaking other people's system. I added the compatibility level stuff so that you get to choose. Wietse
Re: Upgrade postfix 2.11 to 3.1
I hate to bug you gurus, but can you guys mention which config file parameters go in, that is main or master. I simply don't know postfix that well, and RTFMing requires knowing which document to read. I've been hesitant to upgrade to postfix 3 given that everything is working on 2.11, but the handwriting is on the wall. I gather you just do the upgrade and see what breaks? Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. Original Message From: Wietse Venema Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2016 4:26 AM To: Postfix users Reply To: Postfix users Subject: Re: Upgrade postfix 2.11 to 3.1 Matthias Fechner: > Does this mean, I do not have to modify anything in the config? > Regarding the page http://www.postfix.org/COMPATIBILITY_README.html > postfix would log explicit lines if I have to touch anything. If you don't want those lines to be logged, set the parameter (relayhost, or whatever it is that needs to be kept), and set "compatibility_level = 2".
Re: Upgrade postfix 2.11 to 3.1
Matthias Fechner: > Does this mean, I do not have to modify anything in the config? > Regarding the page http://www.postfix.org/COMPATIBILITY_README.html > postfix would log explicit lines if I have to touch anything. If you don't want those lines to be logged, set the parameter (relayhost, or whatever it is that needs to be kept), and set "compatibility_level = 2".
Upgrade postfix 2.11 to 3.1
Dear all, with postfix 3.1 some settings have changed and I'm not sure if I have to touch my config. I only see the following messages: Mar 3 11:51:54 server postfix[75578]: Postfix is running with backwards-compatible default settings Mar 3 11:51:54 server postfix[75578]: See http://www.postfix.org/COMPATIBILITY_README.html for details Mar 3 11:51:54 server postfix[75578]: To disable backwards compatibility use "postconf compatibility_level=2" and "postfix reload" Mar 3 11:51:54 server postfix/postfix-script[75584]: refreshing the Postfix mail system Mar 3 11:51:54 server postfix/master[3613]: reload -- version 2.11.7, configuration /usr/local/etc/postfix Does this mean, I do not have to modify anything in the config? Regarding the page http://www.postfix.org/COMPATIBILITY_README.html postfix would log explicit lines if I have to touch anything. Would this log line immediately be logged or only if a mail is delivered? Thanks Matthias -- "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning." -- Rich Cook
Re: upgrade postfix
On 31/10/2011 6:07 μμ, Amira Othman wrote: I am trying to upgrade postfix version form 2.3 to 2.7 but each time I finish installing rpm I get error Since you are in CentOS (as you describe in earlier posts), I would suggest you to follow these *easy* directions and upgrade to 2.8 (latest): http://stevejenkins.com/blog/2011/01/building-postfix-2-8-on-rhel5-centos-5-from-source/ This is what I'm doing and it works flawlessly every time - on many CentOS 5.x servers. This method will ensure that all standard CentOS postfix build options will be compiled in. Nick smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: upgrade postfix
* Amira Othman : > Hi all > > > > I am trying to upgrade postfix version form 2.3 to 2.7 but each time I > finish installing rpm I get error > > smtpd_sasl_auth_enable is true, but SASL support is not compiled in I guess the version you're updating to has no SASL support compiled in. Which package are you installing? -- Ralf Hildebrandt Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962 ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de
Re: upgrade postfix
Am 31.10.2011 17:07, schrieb Amira Othman: > I am trying to upgrade postfix version form 2.3 to 2.7 but each time I finish > installing rpm I get error > > smtpd_sasl_auth_enable is true, but SASL support is not compiled in > > and when I run saslfinger –c I have nothing in authentication mechanisms. I > didn’t compile rpm by myself I googled > it and get .should I compile it by self or there is solution for this problem? we are missing the information WHICH rpm you install generally: be careful with random rpm sources signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
upgrade postfix
Hi all I am trying to upgrade postfix version form 2.3 to 2.7 but each time I finish installing rpm I get error smtpd_sasl_auth_enable is true, but SASL support is not compiled in and when I run saslfinger -c I have nothing in authentication mechanisms. I didn't compile rpm by myself I googled it and get .should I compile it by self or there is solution for this problem? The sasl configuration was working fine with the old version Regards
