Hello all,
While configuring a new Fedora 21 workstation yesterday evening, I ran
into something that I found interesting. I installed Spamassassin,
tried to start it, and got the following entry in the logs:
systemd: Failed at step EXEC spawning /sbin/portrelease: No such file or
Am 05.02.2015 um 21:56 schrieb Tom Rivers:
While configuring a new Fedora 21 workstation yesterday evening, I ran
into something that I found interesting. I installed Spamassassin,
tried to start it, and got the following entry in the logs:
systemd: Failed at step EXEC spawning
On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 04:05:26PM -0500, Tom Rivers wrote:
On 2/5/2015 15:58, Reindl Harald wrote:
why in the world does SA need portreserve?
To be honest, I'm not sure that SA is the package that needs it. It is
actually systemd that references it in the spamassassin.service file:
SA
On 2/5/2015 16:23, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
SA needs portreserve exactly for the reason portreserve was written:
SA assigned port is 783, and there's a risk portmap will hijack it.
Missing dependency seems like packaging bug.
Thanks for the insight, Tomasz!
Tom
--
devel mailing list
On 2/5/2015 16:21, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175798
I seem to have thought one of my co-maintainers would take care of
fixing this, and perhaps he thought I was going to. ;(
I'll get an update pushed out (or someone will) soon.
Thanks Kevin!
Tom
--
On 2/5/2015 15:58, Reindl Harald wrote:
why in the world does SA need portreserve?
To be honest, I'm not sure that SA is the package that needs it. It is
actually systemd that references it in the spamassassin.service file:
# cat /usr/lib/systemd/system/spamassassin.service
[Unit]
On Thu, 05 Feb 2015 16:05:26 -0500
Tom Rivers t...@impact-crater.com wrote:
On 2/5/2015 15:58, Reindl Harald wrote:
why in the world does SA need portreserve?
To be honest, I'm not sure that SA is the package that needs it. It
is actually systemd that references it in the
Once upon a time, Tomasz Torcz to...@pipebreaker.pl said:
Cleaner way would be to implement socket activation in spamd. I've
looked into doing this. After looking into spamd I have no idea
how to implement sock-act cleanly.
SA is definitely (of course IMHO) one of the types of things that
Am 05.02.2015 um 22:05 schrieb Tom Rivers:
On 2/5/2015 15:58, Reindl Harald wrote:
why in the world does SA need portreserve?
To be honest, I'm not sure that SA is the package that needs it. It is
actually systemd that references it in the spamassassin.service file:
# cat
On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 03:44:29PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Tomasz Torcz to...@pipebreaker.pl said:
Cleaner way would be to implement socket activation in spamd. I've
looked into doing this. After looking into spamd I have no idea
how to implement sock-act cleanly.
10 matches
Mail list logo
