Hello all.
Yesterday I followed the exim wiki page on SPF to add SPF to my exim
4.69 system:
http://wiki.exim.org/SPF I wanted to discuss some
differences I encountered and what I did to work around them. I don't
mind adjusting the wiki to fix it if it needs it, but I want to see if
others can spot anything I did differently than the wiki expects.
1. I was building an rpm on a system that does not have libspf2
available. Rather than build a libspf2 rpm, I just decided to put the
libspf2 source into the exim src rpm and build it if a macro build_spf
was enabled.
2. I extract the source, configure it, patch it, and then make.
3. I copy the libspf2.so to a place where the linking process will be
able to find it.
4. I make a symlink to the libspf2 include directory so exim's include
process will be able to find headers.
5. I modify exim to build the spf.so lookup module. The reality is
that I had to perl -pi -e the src/lookups/Makefile in order to make it
build the spf lookup module. Nothing I put in Local/Makefile made it
build the lookup module. (It compiled the object file, but didn't
create a shared object lookup module).
6. Build exim with make.
7. I built an exim-spf package which contains libspf2 docs, the
libspf2 binaries (renamed to not conflict with a maybe existing
libspf2 package) and the lookup module.
The differences in the steps are:
#3, the wiki refers to the static library, whereas I am using the
shared library.
#4 is something I had to do since I didn't do a 'make install' with libspf2
#5 because without it, the binary does not have spf support.
Is the reason for those differences the fact that I used libspf2.so
instead of libspf2.a ? The shared object comes out to be 400K and the
static lib ends up being 800K.
--
Regards... Todd
