splitting courier-authlib into master+slave ports

Milan Obuch ports at dino.sk
Sun Apr 24 01:13:35 PDT 2005

On Sunday 24 April 2005 09:33, Jose M Rodriguez wrote:
> El Sábado, 23 de Abril de 2005 23:33, Oliver Lehmann escribió:
> > Milan Obuch wrote:
> > > On Saturday 23 April 2005 22:27, Oliver Lehmann wrote:
> > > > tomorrow i'll test if installing/deleting with packages works as
> > > > expected (adding/deleting user, sysconftool calls...)
> > >
> > > I did test this - installed meta port, dependency installed base
> > > port and userdb (selected method) port. Adding/deleting user
> > > courier works. To me this looks OK. I will test this against
> > > courier port (0.49 changed). Milan
> >
> > as a port or as a package? I've installed now all ports as package
> > and it looks like everything works as well. Of course, the functional
> > test I can only do with the vchkpw/vpopmail interface. Used with
> > courier-imap and sqwebmail. As far as I can see, it works.
> >
> > Anything left?
> At last here, one potential problem arise:
> courier-authlib-base doesn't have any passwd components.

... which I consider to be good. It should be possible for user to select 
which one he wants.

> I think we must take off courier-authlib-pwd and courier-authlib-pam and
> direct build courier-authlib-base with pam support.

I do not agree here. To me this new design is better. I am building mail 
servers with virtual hosting and I do not want any unneeded components 
installed. Even small ones.

> This makes courier-authlib-base a good substitute of courier-authlib in
> dependencies.

For this particular problem, we should add a message telling 'no 
authentication module installed'. I see here just one problem - base 
port/package needs to be installed first, so this test will go to all ports 
depending on courier-authlib... Or maybe after installing base port we could 
just test the presence of options for meta port, and if this file/directory 
does not exist, issue a warning message to the user. This way we can even add 
confirmation request to the user. 

To me this should be enough. If someone reads this message, he/she should 
understand without authentication module every attempt fails. If someone does 
not read install messages, well, we can't do anything for him...

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list