Bug 1781181
| Summary: | Removing libdb dependency from sendmail | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Filip Januš <fjanus> | |
| Component: | sendmail | Assignee: | Jaroslav Škarvada <jskarvad> | |
| Status: | ASSIGNED --- | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | ||
| Priority: | unspecified | |||
| Version: | 39 | CC: | anon.amish, jskarvad, redhat-bugzilla | |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened | |
| Target Release: | --- | |||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | |||
| OS: | Unspecified | |||
| Whiteboard: | ||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | ||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | ||
| Clone Of: | ||||
| : | 1940427 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2021-05-25 15:13:06 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: | 1778802, 1940427 | |||
|
Description
Filip Januš
2019-12-09 13:42:16 UTC
Filip, do you see any chance for some libdb vs. lmdb code hacking in order to replace libdb by lmdb in Sendmail? Maybe I'm wrong, but I've somehow in my mind that the single GDBM maintainer is quite busy. https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2018/q2/206 contains also some GDBM flaws, where I'm not sure if they're all fixed meanwhile. It seems sendmail compiles wight gdbm in rawhide (f32), but it seems it's unsupported, content of the sendmail's README file:
...
GDBM GDBM does not work with sendmail because the additional
security checks and file locking cause problems. Unfortunately,
gdbm does not provide a compile flag in its version of ndbm.h so
the code can adapt. Until the GDBM authors can fix these problems,
GDBM will not be supported. Please use Berkeley DB instead.
...
I haven't tried how functional it is.
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 32 development cycle. Changing version to 32. Are there some news with GDBM and sendmail compatibility? We would like to move forward, so if it stuck in this point, we should find some solution, because nobody want maintain libdb longer than it's necessary. (In reply to Filip Januš from comment #4) > Are there some news with GDBM and sendmail compatibility? > We would like to move forward, so if it stuck in this point, we should find > some solution, because nobody want maintain libdb longer than it's necessary. AFAIK no progress in upstream. I also found notice in the Sendmail Installation and Operational guide that the gdbm doesn't work. IMHO currently REGEX, DB, NIS, NIS+, LDAP, DNS maps are supported. By dropping DB we would lose local db support. Unfortunately, I don't have influence on the sendmail upstream and currently I am not aware of matured downstream patch adding some DB replacement. It's the same even with the development version of the sendmail (8.17.0.PreAlpha1). Maybe we could switch to CDB, which seems supported for a while, but personally I have no experience with CDB and sendmail but I will try to compile with tinyCDB in rawhide. (In reply to Jaroslav Škarvada from comment #7) I enabled CDB map support in sendmail-8.16.1-3.fc34 for testing. Ok, great I hope, it will work. If I can somehow help. I'd like to do so. This message is a reminder that Fedora 32 is nearing its end of life. Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 32 on 2021-05-25. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '32'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 32 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. Fedora 32 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2021-05-25. Fedora 32 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 38 development cycle. Changing version to 38. This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 39 development cycle. Changing version to 39. |