On 2009-07-30 at 08:32 +0300, Artis Caune wrote:
> I found whats wrong, but not sure who is wrong: exim or FreeBSD.
> Exim use "first? DB_FIRST : DB_NEXT" in db v2, v3, but in v1 it use
> "R_FIRST : 0", but R_FIRST is not 0:
>
> /usr/include/db.h:#define R_FIRST 3 /* seq */
>
> FreeBSD r190495 introduced this loop, but only if used incorrectly.
> So it looks like both should be fixed.
> Patch was obtained from OpenBSD (and/or NetBSD) so I think same problem here.
Good diagnosis, thanks.
Exim should be using R_NEXT, but the previous code has worked for
everyone until FreeBSD 8, so I suspect a value change from the defaults
(which would be an ABI change too).
> This patch fix problem for me:
I filed a bug with a patch which is less likely to run into issues on
obscure platforms where I've no idea what flags do or do not exist, when
Exim has apparently worked fine with the old value before.
http://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=871
Regards,
-Phil
