MailScanner on yum repository

Scott Silva ssilva at
Fri Jan 4 19:54:32 GMT 2008

on 1/4/2008 11:05 AM Mark Nienberg spake the following:
> Jason Ede wrote:
>> Hugo,
>> When do you plan to put 4.66 onto the yum respository?
>> I’ve used it to install mailscanner and it went on like a dream apart 
>> from needing the mailtools patch for which I’ll need to wait for 4.66
> I played around with the repo too when I was setting up a new server.  
> Initially I thought I could use the yum priorities plugin to prevent 
> installation of packages from rpmforge that were already in the centOS 
> base repo. This won't work though, because one of the requires for 
> MailScanner is a recent SA and there is an old SA package in the base 
> repo, so the priorities plugin prevents yum from finding the new SA 
> package in rpmforge.  You have to disable the priorities plugin or 
> assign rpmforge an equal priority with the base repo, which effectively 
> does the same thing.
> Then the problem of package updates in the rpmforge repo breaking a 
> working MailScanner started to show up.
> Upon further reflection, I think there are a few ways to make this 
> work.  One would be to specify exact package version requirements in the 
> mailscanner-wrapper spec file. So instead of:
> Requires: perl-MIME-tools >= 5.412
> specify the exact package known to work with MailScanner.  This should 
> be the version provided in Julian's install package.  I think yum would 
> then refuse to upgrade those packages when new ones come out on 
> rpmforge, which would be good.  In fact, this would be an improvement 
> over using Julian's installation script, because having the 
> mailscanner-wrapper rpm installed would protect you against updates that 
> might break your mailscanner.
> Another option would be to maintain a complete repo with all the 
> packages needed, and then use the priorities plugin to give this repo a 
> higher priority than rpmforge.  I don't know much about maintaining 
> repos. Maybe the packages are just copied over from rpmforge.
> I confess that ultimately I went back to the standard install script 
> (which works perfectly well of course), but I think the repo method 
> could be made to work with some volunteer effort, and may even offer 
> some advantages as outlined above.
> Mark
I have to confess that I might also go back to Julian's install script. I want 
to get these servers online by the end of the month.

MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!

More information about the MailScanner mailing list