Bug#926878: unblock: exim4/4.92-5

[Andreas Metzler]

On 2019-04-11 Paul Gevers <elbrus at debian.org> wrote:
> Control: tags -1 moreinfo

> Hi Andreas,

> On 11-04-2019 19:51, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>> The second notable change is related to sa-exim. Exim in Debian was
>> patched to allow dlopening a localscan() module. The single consumer of
>> this patch in Debian is sa-exim. (The patch also originates there.)

>> The patch in Debian has been nonfunctional in unstable for quite some
>> time (4.92~RC2-1/experimental/18 Dec, 4.92~RC3-1 unstable/26 Dec and
>> buster/03 Jan). The issue only popped up end of March on the upstream
>> user support ML.

>> Looking at the state of sa-exim (dead upstream since 2006 and buggy: 
>> https://lists.exim.org/lurker/message/20180726.113354.6d03efde.en.html
>> #879687) we have decided stop patching exim, which resulted in 4.92-5,
>> which
>> - improves the example/docs for content-scanning in exim without sa-exim
>> - drops the abovementioned patch and the virtual Provides for
>>   exim4-localscanapi-2.0 and also drops the exim-dev packages (only
>>   needed for sa-exim). Exim now also Conflicts with sa-exim.

> I am probably missing something, but as far as I see it, your packages
> can't migrate to testing/buster because it would make sa-exim
> uninstallable.

uninstallable and unbuildable.

> If I am right, please coordinate with the maintainer of
> sa-exim (in CC). At least at this moment they should agree that it is
> alright to remove sa-exim from buster. I am not seeing any serious bugs
> reported against sa-exim so they may not be aware of the issue.

I had X-Debbugs-Cc'ed sa-exim at pdo on this report. I will also open a rc
bug suggesting sa-exim removal to hash this out properly.

cu Andreas
-- 
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'