Mailing List Archive

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 esr@thyrsus.com wrote:

> This is automatically generated email about problems in a man page for which
> you appear to be responsible. If you are not the right person or list, tell
> me and I will attempt to correct my database.

I have no idea who generated a man page for eximstats. It is a Perl
script that is maintained by Steve Campbell (cc'd). Its documentation is
simple, and is obtained by running "eximstats --help". Eximstats is
part of the Exim distribution, and all that is distributed is the Perl
script. Presumably somebody who packages up Exim has decided that there
should be a man page. Perhaps you can discover by looking at the
distribution where you found the broken man page. I'm afraid there is
nothing that I can do about this.

Regards,
Philip

--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.



> See http://catb.org/~esr/doclifter/problems.html for details on how and
> why these patches were generated. Feel free to email me with any questions.
> Note: These patches do not change the mod date of any manual page. You
> may wish to do that by hand.
>
> Problems with eximstats.8:
>
> 1. Unknown or invalid macro. That is, one that does not fit in the
> macro set that the man page seems to be using. This is a serious
> error; it often means part of your text is being lost or rendered
> incorrectly.
>
> --- eximstats.8-orig 2004-07-10 07:53:30.550262592 -0400
> +++ eximstats.8 2004-07-10 07:53:59.400876632 -0400
> @@ -139,7 +139,7 @@
> \& eximstats -merge [Options] report.1.txt report.2.txt ... > weekly_report.txt
> .Ve
> .PP
> -Options:
> +.SH OPTIONS
> .IP "\fB\-h\fR\fInumber\fR" 4
> .IX Item "-hnumber"
> histogram divisions per hour. The default is 1, and
> -----------------------------
>
> --
> Eric S. Raymond
>
> --
> ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##

>>>>> "Philip" == Philip Hazel <ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk> writes:

Philip> I have no idea who generated a man page for eximstats. It
Philip> is a Perl script that is maintained by Steve Campbell
Philip> (cc'd). Its documentation is simple, and is obtained by
Philip> running "eximstats --help". Eximstats is part of the Exim
Philip> distribution, and all that is distributed is the Perl
Philip> script. Presumably somebody who packages up Exim has
Philip> decided that there should be a man page. Perhaps you can
Philip> discover by looking at the distribution where you found
Philip> the broken man page. I'm afraid there is nothing that I

Debian presumably :-

AUTHOR
This manual page was stitched together by Christoph Lameter <clameter@debian.org> from the original
documentation coming with the sourcepackage for the Debian GNU/Linux system.

In any case this is fixed already in Debian's testing (which will be
the next stable in how many weeks/months).

Sincerely,

Adrian Phillips

--
Who really wrote the works of William Shakespeare ?
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shakespeare/

On 2004-11-22 Philip Hazel <ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 esr@thyrsus.com wrote:

> > This is automatically generated email about problems in a man page
> > for which you appear to be responsible. If you are not the right
> > person or list, tell me and I will attempt to correct my database.

> I have no idea who generated a man page for eximstats. It is a Perl
> script that is maintained by Steve Campbell (cc'd). Its documentation is
> simple, and is obtained by running "eximstats --help".

eximstats includes documentation in POD format which can be extracted
and converted to a manpage, e.g. we at Debian do that and ship the
result:
pod2man --center=EXIM --section=8 eximstats eximstats.8

> Eximstats is
> part of the Exim distribution, and all that is distributed is the Perl
> script. Presumably somebody who packages up Exim has decided that there
> should be a man page. Perhaps you can discover by looking at the
> distribution where you found the broken man page. I'm afraid there is
> nothing that I can do about this.

As the documentation is embedded in the perl-script afaict this should
fix it:
----------------------------
--- /usr/sbin/eximstats 2004-11-20 11:32:17.000000000 +0100
+++ /tmp/eximstats 2004-11-22 10:50:45.000000000 +0100
@@ -191,7 +191,7 @@
eximstats [Options] mainlog1 mainlog2 ... > report.txt
eximstats -merge [Options] report.1.txt report.2.txt ... > weekly_report.txt

-Options:
+=head1 OPTIONS

=over 4

----------------------------
hth, cu andreas
--
"See, I told you they'd listen to Reason," [SPOILER] Svfurlr fnlf,
fuhggvat qbja gur juveyvat tha.
Neal Stephenson in "Snow Crash"

This same problem was brought up a while back with the Fedora
distribution. It only occured when using specific pod2man options and
had been resolved in the latest version of eximstats (v 1.33) available
from http://www.computurn.com/exim/

Phil,
Could we include this version in the next exim release?

Thanks,
Steve


> As the documentation is embedded in the perl-script afaict this should
> fix it:
> ----------------------------
> --- /usr/sbin/eximstats 2004-11-20 11:32:17.000000000 +0100
> +++ /tmp/eximstats 2004-11-22 10:50:45.000000000 +0100
> @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@
> eximstats [Options] mainlog1 mainlog2 ... > report.txt
> eximstats -merge [Options] report.1.txt report.2.txt ... >
> weekly_report.txt
>
> -Options:
> +=head1 OPTIONS
>
> =over 4

Philip Hazel <ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk>:
> I have no idea who generated a man page for eximstats. It is a Perl
> script that is maintained by Steve Campbell (cc'd). Its documentation is
> simple, and is obtained by running "eximstats --help". Eximstats is
> part of the Exim distribution, and all that is distributed is the Perl
> script. Presumably somebody who packages up Exim has decided that there
> should be a man page. Perhaps you can discover by looking at the
> distribution where you found the broken man page. I'm afraid there is
> nothing that I can do about this.

Thanks, let's hope Steve will know who the right person to bug.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>

Adrian Phillips <a.phillips@met.no>:
> AUTHOR
> This manual page was stitched together by Christoph Lameter <clameter@debian.org> from the original
> documentation coming with the sourcepackage for the Debian GNU/Linux system.
>
> In any case this is fixed already in Debian's testing (which will be
> the next stable in how many weeks/months).

Good. I'll mark this accepted and list you and Christoph as responsible.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>

Steve Campbell <campbels@computurn.com>:
> This same problem was brought up a while back with the Fedora
> distribution. It only occured when using specific pod2man options and
> had been resolved in the latest version of eximstats (v 1.33) available
> from http://www.computurn.com/exim/

Aha! So there *is* an upstream fix.

> Could we include this version in the next exim release?
>
> Thanks,
> Steve
>
>
> > As the documentation is embedded in the perl-script afaict this should
> > fix it:
> > ----------------------------
> > --- /usr/sbin/eximstats 2004-11-20 11:32:17.000000000 +0100
> > +++ /tmp/eximstats 2004-11-22 10:50:45.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@
> > eximstats [Options] mainlog1 mainlog2 ... > report.txt
> > eximstats -merge [Options] report.1.txt report.2.txt ... >
> > weekly_report.txt
> >
> > -Options:
> > +=head1 OPTIONS
> >
> > =over 4

Please do. This is a clear markup error, exactly the sort of thing my
tests are designed to catch.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Eric S. Raymond wrote:

> Aha! So there *is* an upstream fix.

Apparently so. You learn something new every day.

> > Could we include this version in the next exim release?

Yes, of course. Will do.

Regards,
Philip

--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.

Philip Hazel <ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk>:
> > > Could we include this version in the next exim release?
>
> Yes, of course. Will do.

Thank you. You're a class act, Philip. And while I've got your
attention, I have two further questions:

1. Are there Fedora Core 3 RPMs for exim? I've had a bit set to switch away
from sendmail for a while.

2. Does exim have integral SPF support yet?
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Eric S. Raymond wrote:

> 1. Are there Fedora Core 3 RPMs for exim? I've had a bit set to switch away
> from sendmail for a while.

Nigel Metheringham used to make RPMs; I'm not sure what the state of
those is now. He sees this mailing list, so may repond. Nigel? I have
to confess that I leave all that packaging stuff to other people; I just
play with the base code. :-)

> 2. Does exim have integral SPF support yet?

Those who are keen on SPF[1] have, as I understand it, found ways of
configuring Exim to do what they want. A google for "Exim SPF" finds a
number of hits. I don't know of any SPF-specific change that is wanted,
except perhaps this item from the WishList:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(270) 01-Jun-04 M Add headers at top and middle

Various initiatives like SPF and DomainKeys require header lines to be added
above or in the middle of existing headers. Exim always adds at the bottom.
When these requirements are more standard and clearer, some way of controlling
where header lines are added will probably become necessary. Some new syntax
will be required.

This can now be done fairly generally from local_scan(), and at the start and
after the Received: block from an ACL. Is anything more needed?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The final paragraph applies only to the latest release (4.43). As part
of the integration of Exiscan into the mainline code, some further
flexibility in this area will happen. With luck, this release is likely
to happen fairly early next year.

Regards,
Philip
-------------------
[1] You may gather that I am not keen on SPF. The reason is that it
breaks traditional forwarding, something that is very common in academic
environments such as mine.

--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.

On 23 Nov 2004, Philip Hazel wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> > 1. Are there Fedora Core 3 RPMs for exim?

> Nigel Metheringham used to make RPMs; I'm not sure what the state of
> those is now.

Nigel wanted to give it a break, so I'm currently maintaining the RPMs on
ftp.exim.org. At the moment I have only built packages for Red Hat 7.3 and
Fedora Core 1, but I have just got a nice build system working which lets
me build on an arbitrary number of distributions by running a single
command (as long as I've had the time/disk space to install them and
enough RAM to run them concurrently :) I left a build running last night
and I now have packages for RHEL3 and SuSE 9.1 here (along with updated
ones for FC1/RH73) which include the "errors_to freezes inappropriately"
patch. There was also a request for Red Hat 9, so when I get a minute I'll
probably install a RH9 build machine.

However, it's worth noting that Fedora Core >= 2 now includes Exim anyway.
Indeed, I believe (though I haven't installed it yet) that FC3 has Exim
4.43 included. The RPM packaging is virtually or wholly identical; Nigel
and whoever at RH is doing the packaging have swapped ideas on the
packaging several times. I believe Nigel's intention was to stop building
for FC3+; what I do will probably largely depend on if/how quickly the
Fedora people build new RPMs after an Exim release. If they do it
regularly, then there's probably not much point in me maintaining separate
packages. If they don't, maybe there is. Perhaps I'll get in contact with
the RH maintainer to discuss.

In any case, the SRPMs available have built-in recognition of and support
for FC3 (added by Nigel; I haven't tested myself yet), so rebuilding from
source should be just a case of "rpmbuild --rebuild exim-foobar.src.rpm"


Tim

On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 09:18 +0000, Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> > 1. Are there Fedora Core 3 RPMs for exim? I've had a bit set to switch away
> > from sendmail for a while.
>
> Nigel Metheringham used to make RPMs; I'm not sure what the state of
> those is now. He sees this mailing list, so may repond. Nigel? I have
> to confess that I leave all that packaging stuff to other people; I just
> play with the base code. :-)

Red Hat produce Fedora 2 and 3 RPMs as part of the main Fedora
distribution.

Tim Jackson produces RPMs for some earlier/other RH/Fedora versions. I
don't actually need to build my own RPMs any more since I don't have any
older RH boxes that need exim support so I stopped producing them
myself. Tim's are on ftp.exim.org/pub/rpm-for-exim/ - which is where
the ones I used to produce were dropped.

> > 2. Does exim have integral SPF support yet?

I understand the exiscan extension includes SPF. The Fedora RPMs are
built with exiscan, although I don't know if SPF is configured in (or
even if it needs build time configuring in). As I am another SPF
sceptic I haven't followed this up.

[.A nitpick - this is actually the wrong mailing list for this sort of
thing - exim-dev is probably misnamed, since its intended to manage the
development process as we transition from a Cambridge Cathedral to
something more Bizarre. exim-users would actually be the right list].

Nigel.
--
[ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@InTechnology.co.uk ]
[. - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]

Tim Jackson <lists@timj.co.uk>:
> However, it's worth noting that Fedora Core >= 2 now includes Exim anyway.

rpm -qi says it does. Good. Now I'll just have to figure out how to switch
MTAs.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>

On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 08:44:14AM -0500,
Eric S. Raymond <esr@thyrsus.com> is thought to have said:

> Tim Jackson <lists@timj.co.uk>:
> > However, it's worth noting that Fedora Core >= 2 now includes Exim anyway.
>
> rpm -qi says it does. Good. Now I'll just have to figure out how to switch
> MTAs.

It's probably built to use the alternatives system. So you can switch with
'/usr/sbin/alternatives --config mta'

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Tabor J. Wells twells@fsckit.net
Fsck It! Just another victim of the ambient morality

On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 09:24 -0500, Tabor J. Wells wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 08:44:14AM -0500,
> Eric S. Raymond <esr@thyrsus.com> is thought to have said:
>
> > Tim Jackson <lists@timj.co.uk>:
> > > However, it's worth noting that Fedora Core >= 2 now includes Exim anyway.
> >
> > rpm -qi says it does. Good. Now I'll just have to figure out how to switch
> > MTAs.
>
> It's probably built to use the alternatives system. So you can switch with
> '/usr/sbin/alternatives --config mta'

It is built against alternatives, so that will work if you can figure
out the alternatives syntax.

However since the other MTAs use alternatives too, cutting down the
alternatives to just one works fine - thats what I normally do :-)

yum install exim
yum erase sendmail
yum erase postfix

Nigel.

[Promoting system administration with large mallets and no subtlety]

--
[ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@InTechnology.co.uk ]
[. - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> 1. Are there Fedora Core 3 RPMs for exim? I've had a bit set to switch away
> from sendmail for a while.

The following exim RPMs are in Fedora core3:
exim-4.43-1.i386.rpm exim-mon-4.43-1.i386.rpm
exim-doc-4.43-1.i386.rpm exim-sa-4.43-1.i386.rpm

>
> 2. Does exim have integral SPF support yet?
>

Back to you Phillip!

Steve

On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 09:40 +0000, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
> I understand the exiscan extension includes SPF. The Fedora RPMs are
> built with exiscan, although I don't know if SPF is configured in (or
> even if it needs build time configuring in).

It would need to be, and it isn't.

> As I am another SPF sceptic I haven't followed this up.

Although I'm not actually the maintainer of that package, and I'll be
taking a large blunt implement to anyone else who tries to add SPF
support to Fedora's Exim RPM. I think it'll remain SPF-free for the time
being.

Eric, I'd recommend that you investigate other solutions which aren't so
broken.

--
dwmw2