http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.15.tar.gz http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.15.tar.gz.sig Some small fixes and changes to v2.2.14. This release is mainly in the hope that it could still make it into the next Debian stable instead of v2.2.14 - mainly because of a couple of new assert crashes that started happening in v2.2.14 and should be fixed now. * Plugins can now print a banner comment in doveconf output (typically the plugin version) * Replication plugin now triggers low (instead of high) priority for mail copying operations. * IMAP/POP3/ManageSieve proxy: If destination server can't be connected to, retry connecting once per second up to the value of proxy_timeout. This allows quick restarts/upgrades on the backend server without returning login failures. * Internal passdb lookups (e.g. done by lmtp/doveadm proxy) wasn't returning failure in some situations where it should have (e.g. allow_nets mismatch) * LMTP uses mail_log_prefix now for logging mail deliveries instead of a hardcoded prefix. The non-delivery log prefix is still hardcoded though. + passdb allow_nets=local matches lookups that don't contain an IP address (internally done by Dovecot services) + Various debug logging and error logging improvements - Various race condition fixes to LAYOUT=index - v2.2.14 virtual plugin crashed in some situations
On Fri, 24 Oct 2014, Timo Sirainen wrote:> Some small fixes and changes to v2.2.14. This release is mainly in the > hope that it could still make it into the next Debian stable instead of > v2.2.14 - mainly because of a couple of new assert crashes that started > happening in v2.2.14 and should be fixed now. >Timo, FYI at the moment we think we will probably go with 2.2.13. That there are still assert crashes in the latest release makes us a little bit concerned if we should use that so close to the freeze. (Effectively this Sunday for new upstream releases.) In your honest opinion are we being overcautious? Are there any compelling reasons we must go with 2.2.15 for Jessie or will 2.2.13 be adequate? Also I have one minor issue to report. dovecot broke API from 2.2.13 to 2.2.14 but it only provides version macros for the first two components of the version number. This has caused a small upgrade problem for the antispam plugin which is in a separate package (dovecot-antispam.) Was that addressed in 2.2.15? -- Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at debian.org>
On Saturday 25 of October 2014, Timo Sirainen wrote:> http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.15.tar.gz > http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.15.tar.gz.sigTest suite passes but at the end: fatal_printf_format_fix .............................................. : ok 0 / 190 tests failed ==6098== Invalid read of size 16 ==6098== at 0x317B880804: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A93B6: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8AAA21: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9C0F: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9F94: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x42A0D7: utc_mktime (utc-mktime.c:39) ==6098== by 0x41340B: iso8601_date_do_parse (iso8601-date.c:250) ==6098== by 0x4134C0: iso8601_date_parse_tm (iso8601-date.c:274) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date_valid (test-iso8601-date.c:75) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date (test-iso8601-date.c:145) ==6098== by 0x40D3E0: test_run_funcs (test-common.c:305) ==6098== by 0x40DA5C: test_run_with_fatals (test-common.c:362) ==6098== by 0x317B821C14: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== Address 0x5d22690 is 16 bytes inside a block of size 20 alloc'd ==6098== at 0x4A05C00: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A93CB: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8AAA21: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9C0F: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9F94: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x42A0D7: utc_mktime (utc-mktime.c:39) ==6098== by 0x41340B: iso8601_date_do_parse (iso8601-date.c:250) ==6098== by 0x4134C0: iso8601_date_parse_tm (iso8601-date.c:274) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date_valid (test-iso8601-date.c:75) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date (test-iso8601-date.c:145) ==6098== by 0x40D3E0: test_run_funcs (test-common.c:305) ==6098== by 0x40DA5C: test_run_with_fatals (test-common.c:362) ==6098== by 0x317B821C14: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== ==6098== Invalid read of size 8 ==6098== at 0x317B88032A: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A93B6: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8AAA21: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9C0F: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9F94: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x42A0D7: utc_mktime (utc-mktime.c:39) ==6098== by 0x41340B: iso8601_date_do_parse (iso8601-date.c:250) ==6098== by 0x4134C0: iso8601_date_parse_tm (iso8601-date.c:274) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date_valid (test-iso8601-date.c:75) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date (test-iso8601-date.c:145) ==6098== by 0x40D3E0: test_run_funcs (test-common.c:305) ==6098== by 0x40DA5C: test_run_with_fatals (test-common.c:362) ==6098== by 0x317B821C14: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== Address 0x5d22690 is 16 bytes inside a block of size 20 alloc'd ==6098== at 0x4A05C00: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A93CB: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8AAA21: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9C0F: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9F94: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x42A0D7: utc_mktime (utc-mktime.c:39) ==6098== by 0x41340B: iso8601_date_do_parse (iso8601-date.c:250) ==6098== by 0x4134C0: iso8601_date_parse_tm (iso8601-date.c:274) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date_valid (test-iso8601-date.c:75) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date (test-iso8601-date.c:145) ==6098== by 0x40D3E0: test_run_funcs (test-common.c:305) ==6098== by 0x40DA5C: test_run_with_fatals (test-common.c:362) ==6098== by 0x317B821C14: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== ==6098== Invalid read of size 8 ==6098== at 0x317B880333: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A93B6: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8AAA21: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9C0F: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9F94: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x42A0D7: utc_mktime (utc-mktime.c:39) ==6098== by 0x41340B: iso8601_date_do_parse (iso8601-date.c:250) ==6098== by 0x4134C0: iso8601_date_parse_tm (iso8601-date.c:274) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date_valid (test-iso8601-date.c:75) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date (test-iso8601-date.c:145) ==6098== by 0x40D3E0: test_run_funcs (test-common.c:305) ==6098== by 0x40DA5C: test_run_with_fatals (test-common.c:362) ==6098== by 0x317B821C14: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== Address 0x5d22698 is 4 bytes after a block of size 20 alloc'd ==6098== at 0x4A05C00: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A93CB: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8AAA21: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9C0F: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9F94: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x42A0D7: utc_mktime (utc-mktime.c:39) ==6098== by 0x41340B: iso8601_date_do_parse (iso8601-date.c:250) ==6098== by 0x4134C0: iso8601_date_parse_tm (iso8601-date.c:274) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date_valid (test-iso8601-date.c:75) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date (test-iso8601-date.c:145) ==6098== by 0x40D3E0: test_run_funcs (test-common.c:305) ==6098== by 0x40DA5C: test_run_with_fatals (test-common.c:362) ==6098== by 0x317B821C14: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== ==6098== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) ==6098== at 0x317B8817ED: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A93ED: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8AAA21: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9C0F: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9F94: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x42A0D7: utc_mktime (utc-mktime.c:39) ==6098== by 0x41340B: iso8601_date_do_parse (iso8601-date.c:250) ==6098== by 0x4134C0: iso8601_date_parse_tm (iso8601-date.c:274) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date_valid (test-iso8601-date.c:75) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date (test-iso8601-date.c:145) ==6098== by 0x40D3E0: test_run_funcs (test-common.c:305) ==6098== by 0x40DA5C: test_run_with_fatals (test-common.c:362) ==6098== by 0x317B821C14: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== ==6098== Invalid read of size 8 ==6098== at 0x317B88032A: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A93B6: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8AAA9D: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9C0F: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9F94: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x42A0D7: utc_mktime (utc-mktime.c:39) ==6098== by 0x41340B: iso8601_date_do_parse (iso8601-date.c:250) ==6098== by 0x4134C0: iso8601_date_parse_tm (iso8601-date.c:274) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date_valid (test-iso8601-date.c:75) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date (test-iso8601-date.c:145) ==6098== by 0x40D3E0: test_run_funcs (test-common.c:305) ==6098== by 0x40DA5C: test_run_with_fatals (test-common.c:362) ==6098== by 0x317B821C14: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== Address 0x5d22690 is 16 bytes inside a block of size 20 alloc'd ==6098== at 0x4A05C00: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A93CB: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8AAA21: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9C0F: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9F94: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x42A0D7: utc_mktime (utc-mktime.c:39) ==6098== by 0x41340B: iso8601_date_do_parse (iso8601-date.c:250) ==6098== by 0x4134C0: iso8601_date_parse_tm (iso8601-date.c:274) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date_valid (test-iso8601-date.c:75) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date (test-iso8601-date.c:145) ==6098== by 0x40D3E0: test_run_funcs (test-common.c:305) ==6098== by 0x40DA5C: test_run_with_fatals (test-common.c:362) ==6098== by 0x317B821C14: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== ==6098== Invalid read of size 8 ==6098== at 0x317B880333: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A93B6: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8AAA9D: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9C0F: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9F94: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x42A0D7: utc_mktime (utc-mktime.c:39) ==6098== by 0x41340B: iso8601_date_do_parse (iso8601-date.c:250) ==6098== by 0x4134C0: iso8601_date_parse_tm (iso8601-date.c:274) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date_valid (test-iso8601-date.c:75) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date (test-iso8601-date.c:145) ==6098== by 0x40D3E0: test_run_funcs (test-common.c:305) ==6098== by 0x40DA5C: test_run_with_fatals (test-common.c:362) ==6098== by 0x317B821C14: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== Address 0x5d22698 is 4 bytes after a block of size 20 alloc'd ==6098== at 0x4A05C00: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A93CB: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8AAA21: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9C0F: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x317B8A9F94: ??? (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098== by 0x42A0D7: utc_mktime (utc-mktime.c:39) ==6098== by 0x41340B: iso8601_date_do_parse (iso8601-date.c:250) ==6098== by 0x4134C0: iso8601_date_parse_tm (iso8601-date.c:274) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date_valid (test-iso8601-date.c:75) ==6098== by 0x4062B2: test_iso8601_date (test-iso8601-date.c:145) ==6098== by 0x40D3E0: test_run_funcs (test-common.c:305) ==6098== by 0x40DA5C: test_run_with_fatals (test-common.c:362) ==6098== by 0x317B821C14: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.20.so) ==6098=Makefile:1877: recipe for target 'check-test' failed make[2]: *** [check-test] Error 1 -- Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz, arekm / ( maven.pl | pld-linux.org )
Wolfgang.Friebel at desy.de
2014-Oct-25 17:13 UTC
Segfault in pigeonhole tests with v2.2.15 but not in 2.2.14
On Fri, 24 Oct 2014, Timo Sirainen wrote:> http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.15.tar.gz > http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.15.tar.gz.sig >When building an rpm with dovecot 2.2.15. one test in the pigeonhole-0.4.3 test suite causes a segmentation fault: Test case: ./tests/extensions/editheader/deleteheader.svtest: 1: Test 'Deleteheader - nonexistent' SUCCEEDED make: *** [tests/extensions/editheader/deleteheader.svtest] Segmentation fault error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.kap6R7 (%check) If I just replace the dovecot with the 2.2.14 soure the error disappears. I am compiling on Scientific Linux 6, gcc 4.4.7, but there is no change with 4.8.2. The configure used was ./configure --build=x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu --program-prefix= --prefix=/usr --exec-prefix=/usr --bindir=/usr/bin --sbindir=/usr/sbin --sysconfdir=/etc --datadir=/usr/share --includedir=/usr/include --libdir=/usr/lib64 --libexecdir=/usr/libexec --localstatedir=/var --sharedstatedir=/var/lib --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info INSTALL_DATA=install -c -p -m644 --docdir=/usr/share/doc/dovecot --disable-static --disable-rpath --with-nss --with-shadow --with-pam --with-gssapi=plugin --with-ldap=plugin --with-sql=plugin --with-pgsql --with-mysql --with-sqlite --with-zlib --without-lzma --with-libcap --with-ssl=openssl --with-ssldir=/etc/pki/dovecot --with-solr --with-docs I am using --without-lzma as also the xz compression test fails, but this is hopefully because the liblzma is coming from a very old xz-4.999.9-0.3.beta package. -- Best regards Wolfgang Friebel