New courier packages (was: courier-imap / couriertcpd libtool failure)

[Brian Candler <B.Candler%pobox.com@localhost>]

On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 11:02:23AM +0000, Brian Candler wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 03:30:07PM +0000, Brian Candler wrote:
> > libtool: link: gcc -I./.. -I.. -Wall -Wno-error -Wno-format -fno-builtin
> ...
> > tcpd.o tcpdaccess.o tcpremoteinfo.o -Wl,-ldb ./.libs/libspipe.a
> ...
> > /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -ldb
> > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

Refreshing the source to the latest version of couriertcpd made this problem
go away.

So I've now attempted to bring *all* the courier packages up to the latest
versions. You can find the changes at http://psg.com/~brian/software/pkgsrc/
which update the following packages:

mail/cone
mail/courier-analog
mail/courier-imap
mail/courier-maildir
mail/courier-mta
mail/maildrop
mail/sqwebmail
net/couriertcpd
security/courier-authlib

Mostly all I've done is modify the existing patchsets to make them apply
cleanly.  These two are no longer needed due to upstream merges and should
be removed:

mail/courier-mta/patches/patch-az
mail/courier-imap/patches/patch-an

These packages build OK for me under Ubuntu Linux. However as a newcomer to
pkgsrc, I'd appreciate it if someone could review and/or test these out
before I submit them to the package maintainer.

I also have a few issues to raise:

(1) The packages which use bdb perform autoconf tests for the existence of
-ldb.  This happens to work, I think only by accident, because my base
system includes -ldb.  I think these tests should be bypassed and forced to
pass (or else test for the real library like -ldb4).  However the existing
packages had this problem already, so I've not attempted to address it.

(2) The option --without-certdb in cone and courier-mta was breaking the
build. This is because it was interpreted as --with-certdb=no and 'no'
was being treated as a (relative) filename. So I've just removed this
option entirely. Should there be a comment to this effect in the Makefiles?

(3) Package sqwebmail is marked "vulnerable":
http://secunia.com/advisories/15119/
but I'm not sure if that is still applicable to current code. I've raised
the question on the courier-sqwebmail mailing list.

Regards,

Brian.