questions on debugger_command

[Robert Moskowitz]

In the Centos 6 /etc/postfix/mail.cf there are the lines:

debugger_command =
PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin
ddd $daemon_directory/$process_name $process_id & sleep 5

This parameter (?) does not show in the postconf -n listing. Also this
command takes these 3 lines in main.cf and I wonder how does postfix
know that these lines go together? Showing my lack of knowledge here...

One thing I am thinking MAY be the problem is that this line in main.cf
fails because of a warning comment in main.cf something to the concern
that if you are using an X-based debugger, you should be sure to set up
your XAUTHORITY environment variable before starting Postfix. And since
this is provided in the base install of Centos 6, I *hope* they got this
right...

[Noel Jones]

On 12/23/2012 8:12 AM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> In the Centos 6 /etc/postfix/mail.cf there are the lines:
>
> debugger_command =
> PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin
> ddd $daemon_directory/$process_name $process_id & sleep 5
>
> This parameter (?) does not show in the postconf -n listing. Also
> this command takes these 3 lines in main.cf and I wonder how does
> postfix know that these lines go together? Showing my lack of
> knowledge here...

It would seem wrong for that parameter to be missing from "postconf
-n" output.

The top of the postconf manual page describes how multi line
parameters work. Basically a line starting with whitespace
continues the previous line.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html

You also might notice that issuing the command
# postconf debugger_command
returns the whole value on one line. Or it might return an empty
value, in which case there is more than one debugger_command defined
in main.cf.

>
> One thing I am thinking MAY be the problem is that this line in
> main.cf fails because of a warning comment in main.cf something to
> the concern that if you are using an X-based debugger, you should be
> sure to set up your XAUTHORITY environment variable before starting
> Postfix. And since this is provided in the base install of Centos
> 6, I *hope* they got this right...

Looks OK to me.

If you're still trying to display non-default parameters, google for
the postfinger tool.



-- Noel Jones

[Robert Moskowitz]

On 12/23/2012 09:33 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 12/23/2012 8:12 AM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>> In the Centos 6 /etc/postfix/mail.cf there are the lines:
>>
>> debugger_command =
>> PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin
>> ddd $daemon_directory/$process_name $process_id & sleep 5
>>
>> This parameter (?) does not show in the postconf -n listing. Also
>> this command takes these 3 lines in main.cf and I wonder how does
>> postfix know that these lines go together? Showing my lack of
>> knowledge here...
> It would seem wrong for that parameter to be missing from "postconf
> -n" output.
>
> The top of the postconf manual page describes how multi line
> parameters work. Basically a line starting with whitespace
> continues the previous line.
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html
>
> You also might notice that issuing the command
> # postconf debugger_command
> returns the whole value on one line. Or it might return an empty
> value, in which case there is more than one debugger_command defined
> in main.cf.

postconf debugger_command

returns

postconf: warning: debugger_command: unknown parameter

This is postfix 2.6.6 on Centos 6

[Wietse Venema]

Robert Moskowitz:

> postconf debugger_command
>
> returns
>
> postconf: warning: debugger_command: unknown parameter
>
> This is postfix 2.6.6 on Centos 6

Fixed in Postfix 2.9.

Wietse

[Robert Moskowitz]

On 12/23/2012 09:33 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 12/23/2012 8:12 AM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>> In the Centos 6 /etc/postfix/mail.cf there are the lines:
>>
>> debugger_command =
>> PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin
>> ddd $daemon_directory/$process_name $process_id & sleep 5
>>
>> This parameter (?) does not show in the postconf -n listing. Also
>> this command takes these 3 lines in main.cf and I wonder how does
>> postfix know that these lines go together? Showing my lack of
>> knowledge here...
> It would seem wrong for that parameter to be missing from "postconf
> -n" output.
>
> The top of the postconf manual page describes how multi line
> parameters work. Basically a line starting with whitespace
> continues the previous line.
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html

This is the challenge of RTFM. Which FM? And how do I find it.

>
> You also might notice that issuing the command
> # postconf debugger_command
> returns the whole value on one line. Or it might return an empty
> value, in which case there is more than one debugger_command defined
> in main.cf.
>

>> One thing I am thinking MAY be the problem is that this line in
>> main.cf fails because of a warning comment in main.cf something to
>> the concern that if you are using an X-based debugger, you should be
>> sure to set up your XAUTHORITY environment variable before starting
>> Postfix. And since this is provided in the base install of Centos
>> 6, I *hope* they got this right...
> Looks OK to me.
>
> If you're still trying to display non-default parameters, google for
> the postfinger tool.

This is an old tool, but does not seem to be available for Centos, and I
am not good at building. So I am going to have to go to the Centos list
and see if anyone has it built as an rpm for Centos 6.3. Thanks for the
tip.

[Robert Moskowitz]

ARGH!!! :)

I will submit this to the Centos list and see what they do with it.
Thanks Wietse.

BTW, is this only a problem with reporting debugger_command or is
debugger_command broken until 2.9?

[Wietse Venema]

Robert Moskowitz:
> postconf debugger_command
> returns
> postconf: warning: debugger_command: unknown parameter
> This is postfix 2.6.6 on Centos 6

Wietse:
> Fixed in Postfix 2.9.

> Robert Moskowitz:

> ARGH!!! :)
>
> I will submit this to the Centos list and see what they do with it.
> Thanks Wietse.
>
> BTW, is this only a problem with reporting debugger_command or is
> debugger_command broken until 2.9?

This is a limitation of old postconf implementations, and it is
unlikely that it will be patched (it may be sufficient to add an
entry to postconf/install_table.h and postconf/install_vars.h).

The Postfix 2.9 implementation is a complete rewrite that reports
debugger_command and more importantly, warns about unused parameters
in main.cf or master.cf (typically typos).

Postfix 2.10 brings incremental improvements: postconf reports the
expansion of $name in parameter values, reports parameters that
can't be set in main.cf (process_name, process_id), warns about
attempts to set such read-only parameters, and warns about an unknown
$name in parameter values (typically typos).

All this will help with Postfix troubleshooting and support. Folks
that run four-year old code will have something to look forward to.

Wietse

[Robert Moskowitz]

On 12/23/2012 12:12 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Robert Moskowitz:
>> postconf debugger_command
>> returns
>> postconf: warning: debugger_command: unknown parameter
>> This is postfix 2.6.6 on Centos 6
> Wietse:
>> Fixed in Postfix 2.9.
>> Robert Moskowitz:
>> ARGH!!! :)
>>
>> I will submit this to the Centos list and see what they do with it.
>> Thanks Wietse.
>>
>> BTW, is this only a problem with reporting debugger_command or is
>> debugger_command broken until 2.9?
> This is a limitation of old postconf implementations, and it is
> unlikely that it will be patched (it may be sufficient to add an
> entry to postconf/install_table.h and postconf/install_vars.h).
>
> The Postfix 2.9 implementation is a complete rewrite that reports
> debugger_command and more importantly, warns about unused parameters
> in main.cf or master.cf (typically typos).

Nice.

> Postfix 2.10 brings incremental improvements: postconf reports the
> expansion of $name in parameter values, reports parameters that
> can't be set in main.cf (process_name, process_id), warns about
> attempts to set such read-only parameters, and warns about an unknown
> $name in parameter values (typically typos).
>
> All this will help with Postfix troubleshooting and support. Folks
> that run four-year old code will have something to look forward to.

Right now I am trying to stay with what Centos 6.3 is shipping with.
Perhaps that is risky, but this is a low usage server with a few domains
and a couple handful of users.

My current server is built on F12 with a custom built postfix to add the
quota patch. I just checked and that is running 2.6.5; thus I have
instructions on how to build postfix from source. This is part of why I
want 'stock' rpms and a stable OS base. Right now I need to rebuild on a
new OS platform, either F18 which will ship shortly or Centos 6.3.

I really appreciate all you have done here.

[John Hinton]

Don't submit it to the CentOS list. CentOS is a direct copy, as much as
possible of Redhat. You would need to report this to Redhat and get them
to do the updates before it would make it out to CentOS. You may however
find a repo with a newer version available.

--
John Hinton
877-777-1407 ext 502
http://www.ew3d.com
Comprehensive Online Solutions