Bug 1307081

Summary: [Patch] Timestamps for configuration files are not kept (causes warnings after Postfix update)
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Reporter: Robert Scheck <redhat-bugzilla>
Component: postfixAssignee: Jaroslav Škarvada <jskarvad>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Patrik Moško <pmosko>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 7.2CC: kvolny, olysonek, pmosko, psklenar, robert.scheck, thozza
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: EasyFix, Patch, Reproducer, TestCaseProvided
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: postfix-2.10.1-8.el7 Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: 1307064 Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-03-31 19:10:27 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1716960    
Attachments:
Description Flags
postfix-2.6.6-timestamp.patch
none
patch
none
Backported fix none

Description Robert Scheck 2016-02-12 16:17:34 UTC 
Description of problem:
By default all timestamps of /etc/postfix/* are the timestamps of "make
install" when the RPM package is built. While this is not an issue in general,
this may cause warnings after a postfix update in a common scenario like
this:

Have /etc/postfix/virtual empty (like the default), but reference it within 
main.cf. This needs a "postmap /etc/postfix/virtual" indeed. Everything fine
so far. Then a postfix update happens, /etc/postfix/virtual gets replaced by
the newer file from the RPM package - which leads to a newer timestamp. This 
however makes postfix complaining in logs: "postfix/smtpd[11483]: warning: 
database /etc/postfix/virtual.db is older than source file /etc/postfix/
virtual". The main point here, is that the content of virtual nor virtual.db
changed, just the timestamp of the "source" file.

This issue could be avoided if "install -p" rather "install" is used or if
there is a "touch -c -r <reference>" within the spec file. If there is any
upstream change of one of these files, the newer filestamp would indeed be
applied and thus causes a *.rpmnew (if the original file was touched) - as
it's expected further on.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
postfix-2.10.1-6.el7.x86_64

How reproducible:
Everytime, see above.

Actual results:
Timestamps for configuration files are not kept (causes warnings after Postfix 
update).

Expected results:
Timestamps for configuration files should be kept (thus no Postfix warnings).

Additional info:
Cross-filed case 01582767 on the Red Hat customer portal.
Comment 2 Robert Scheck 2016-02-13 13:02:39 UTC 
Created attachment 1123776 [details]
postfix-2.6.6-timestamp.patch
Comment 3 Ondřej Lysoněk 2016-08-29 14:36:44 UTC 
*** Bug 1365015 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 4 Robert Scheck 2016-08-29 16:32:35 UTC 
As mentioned in bug #1307066 comment #7 the situation and the patch might
not be suitable for upstream, but relevant for downstreams which are not
constantly rebasing Postfix, but patching it like Red Hat does with RHEL;
the situation outlined in the initial description IS real life with RHEL.
Comment 6 Ondřej Lysoněk 2016-10-31 08:09:54 UTC 
Created attachment 1215701 [details]
patch

I'm attaching a new upstream patch. The new '-keep-new-mtime' option will have to be added to the invocation of the 'postfix-install' script in the %install phase of the spec file.
Comment 11 Jaroslav Škarvada 2019-07-23 12:07:34 UTC 
Created attachment 1592868 [details]
Backported fix

Upstream renamed the option '-keep-new-mtime' to '-keep-build-mtime' changing the patch to stay close with upstream.
Comment 17 errata-xmlrpc 2020-03-31 19:10:27 UTC 
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2020:1004