Description of problem: A message that may possibly be relevant to the folks who package postfix is constantly spewing at confused users of postfix like me :-). First, when I did a "dnf install postfix", I see this come out in the DNF output: Installing : postfix-2:3.1.0-1.fc24.x86_64 1088/3005 The unit files have no [Install] section. They are not meant to be enabled using systemctl. Possible reasons for having this kind of units are: 1) A unit may be statically enabled by being symlinked from another unit's .wants/ or .requires/ directory. 2) A unit's purpose may be to act as a helper for some other unit which has a requirement dependency on it. 3) A unit may be started when needed via activation (socket, path, timer, D-Bus, udev, scripted systemctl call, ...). Installing : qmobipocket-16.04.1-1.fc24.x86_64 1089/3005 Later when I ran: alternatives --config mta and picked the number for postfix, the same meaningless gibberish spewed out again. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): postfix-2:3.1.0-1.fc24.x86_64 How reproducible: Seems to be 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. see above 2. 3. Actual results: Meaningless messages Expected results: Either be quiet or say something people might understand if it is important to the actual operation of postfix. Additional info: These message make it sound like postfix will not function as a service, but it seems to work fine, so why the devil are these messages being inflicted on mere users who can't know what the heck they mean? If they are warnings intended for the packager, shouldn't they come out some place like in an rpmlint run? I have a feeling they are being generated by some systemd nonsense, but I have no idea what component I might properly point at, so I use postfix for this bug report because that is where I actually see the messages. Maybe unit files should be allowed to have a: [ShutUpAboutInstall] section that does nothing except suppress this error?
Nothing changed in postfix, it seems to be caused by some change in chkconfig, reproducer: # alternatives --install /usr/sbin/sendmail mta /usr/sbin/sendmail.postfix 60 --slave /usr/bin/mailq mta-mailq /usr/bin/mailq.postfix --initscript postfix Actual result: The unit files have no [Install] section. They are not meant to be enabled using systemctl. Possible reasons for having this kind of units are: 1) A unit may be statically enabled by being symlinked from another unit's .wants/ or .requires/ directory. 2) A unit's purpose may be to act as a helper for some other unit which has a requirement dependency on it. 3) A unit may be started when needed via activation (socket, path, timer, D-Bus, udev, scripted systemctl call, ...). Expected result: No error or non-confusing error Additional info: Postfix provides only one unit file called 'postfix.service', which already has [Install] section.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 24 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 2 (two) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 24. 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 '24'. 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 24 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 24 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2017-08-08. Fedora 24 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.