The recent update to MailScaner 5.0.3 appears to severely break existing 4.x installations in the following ways:
- It does not properly reconstitute the MailScaner.conf file as did previous versions.
- It appears to be configured for the Linux standard install/configure dir tree, not the one long used in FreeBSD.
- The 'mailscanner' executable is not getting installed anywhere/the expected places, and this breaks the various service rc files completely.
- Even if we provide a symlink - MailScanner -> mailscanner, the startup fails because the new executable complains that it cannot find the perl antiword module.
We've judged this be completely unusable at this time and have failed back to 4.85 as our production workaround.
Would you try this patch :
I shall contact submitter for more fix.
(In reply to Wen Heping from comment #1)
This is exactly the bug I reported - I have sent previously the previous patch which was WIP and was by accident committed. It was a combined mistake of mine and the committer.
The patch I provided in https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219938 is fine, but it still removes the user's conf.
I will send in a moment the patch which seems 100% correct in the original PR (https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219938) to not create additional confusion, please test it.
I've fixed it with my own work this afternoon, mostly reverting the changes. If you're going to make changes like this, please ensure that you actually test run the port as well as build it.
I've not got time to merge your fixes in, sorry, but if you want them put in then feel free to send the patch to me and I'll review (I maintained the port before Kevin).
To the OP, this problem should now be sorted, but there may be a few remaining path issues you may notice-- please let me know if you find them.
A commit references this bug:
Date: Fri Jul 28 16:39:23 UTC 2017
New revision: 446838
Partially revert the previous update.
No longer clobber user's configuration.
Fixup most pathnames, works for me now (tm)
(In reply to Chris Rees from comment #3)
I did verify it, but then by accident sent the older version of the patch.
Still, I sent another PR with corrected patch day after it had been committed, which was over a month ago. That version has worked for months for me.
I see you did, which should have gone in much quicker than that, so sorry you had to wait.