On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 23:58 -0600, Eric Rostetter wrote: > Okay, so I just upgraded a RHL 9 machine's sendmail from FL, and have my > first case of missing symlinks. > The missing symlinks is a known issue. New packages are in bugzilla awaiting QA to fix the issue. > It left my sendmail.mc in place and created a new sendmail.mc.rpmnew. This is reasonable. > It then created a new sendmail.cf from sendmail.mc.rpmnew! > This is not. Did it leave a sendmail.cf.bak file? I have looked through the spec file, through the init file and through the Makefile to try and find some way for that to happen and I have come up empty. What's the date on the sendmail.cf file? What's the date on the sendmail.mc file? What version of the sendmail packages did you have installed beforehand? Could you have had a version that put it's sendmail.cf file in /etc? > If I do "m4 sendmail.mc.rpmnew sendmail.cf.from.rpmnew" and then > if I do "diff sendmail.cf sendmail.cf.from.rpmnew" the only > differences are the build time/date/user/etc. > > If I do a "m4 sendmail.mc sendmail.cf.local" and then > if I do "diff sendmail.cf sendmail.cf.local" it has about > 40+ changed lines. > That is pretty weird. > So, the funny thing is it somehow seems to have created the .cf > file from the .rpmnew file... It did not save my old .cf file. > I am guessing it didn't create the .cf file from the .rpmnew file. It probably just wrote out the sendmail.cf file from the rpm as it either didn't think the sendmail.cf file that was already there belonged to the previous sendmail package, or the sendmail.cf file from the previous package was in a different location. So you have another rh9 machine that still has an old sendmail package on it? > I also seems to have created a new /etc/rc.d/init.d/sendmail file, without > saving the old version, AFAICT. > It should have renamed the old one. > And, as noted, I'm missing some symlinks also. All the symlinks in > /etc/alternatives/ look fine. But I'm missing the link from /usr/lib/sendmail > and "man sendmail" doesn't work. > This is fixed in the package awaiting QA. > I'm leaving this machine broken so if anyone has any questions I can answer > them. > Thank you. Marc.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
