Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 102956
Entry for spamd (spamassassin) missing in /etc/services
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:10:31 EST
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686) Gecko/20030703 Galeon/1.3.7
Description of problem:
Sometimes, RPC services get the port number of the SpamAssassin spamd (783/tcp).
Spamd which gets started later on, fails to bind to the port and doesn't work.
IIRC, portmap doesn't use ports listed in /etc/services, so putting this line in
/etc/services would be a fix of the problem:
spamd 783/tcp # SpamAssassin Daemon
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Start system
2. Depending on the moon phase and whatnot, portmap may assign Spamd's port to
one of the RPC services
Actual Results: Spamd didn't start because port 783/tcp was in use.
Expected Results: Spamd starts
spamassassin should register with IANA. :)
Indeed it should. But from looking at
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=480 it seems like this won't
happen soon (someone needs to write up an RFC for the spamd protocol beforehands
which is unlikely to happen soon due to the narrow scope of the protocol). Would
it be better if the spamassassin RPM added the entry as a "local service" to the
end of /etc/services on install?
On the other hand I just noticed that portmap ignores my manual entry in
/etc/services and rpc.mounted again landed on spamd's port... Filed as #102989.
Yeah, I didn't think rpc really actaully avoided stuff in /etc/services... it's
landed on the lpr port before. :/
*** Bug 115958 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Same here, adding spamd to /etc/services does not help.
So it looks like the best solution is to just start spamd
before any rpc services.
Is this still an issue with FC3 or FC4?
This entry is missing on FC3 and FC4, in the setup as well as in the
spamassassin package. I don't know if anything has changed regarding the
behaviour of bindresvport() and ports listed in /etc/services (see bug #102989).
And btw, why is this filed against spamassassin when /etc/services is owned by
the "setup" package?
It was originally with setup, but since the spamassassin port wasn't registered
with IANA (see comments #1 and #2) Bill moved it over to spamassassin itself so
the package would append the port to /etc/services when installed (or something
Isn't that an awfully fragile way of doing it?
Depending on how it's done ;-P. Anyway, unless bug #102989 isn't solved, we
could rather defer the issue, what do you think?
Since Bug 102989 is NOTABUG, and this is meaningless without that bug, closing
NOTABUG here. Please open a new bug if you think of a better solution.