http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1201





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-01-24 09:56 -------
(In reply to comment #31)
> Subject: Re:  RFE: add learning support to spamd/spamc
> 
> > this would be fine. I think following failures should be captured and 
> > differently reported:
> > 
> > - no database (mostly wrong dsn)
> > - no access to db (pherhaps wrong privileges, (wrong user?))
> > 
> > I think there could be a lot more failures needed to be captured. I'll look 
for 
> > more.
> 
> Just return a service unavailable error, see how the handle_user_sql
> stuff is handled.  I think you'll find that specific database errors
> are not returned back to the caller.  It would be up to the site admin
> to run spamd in debug mode to discover that.
> 
> I think you are making the problem more complicated than it needs to
> be.
> 
> Michael
> 

I'll submitt a new spamc-part patch which applies correctly over the current 
trunk (r124864).
I've handled no more errors, as Michael stated above.

- spamc does return an EX_LEARNED (5) if learn/unlearn has been successfully by 
spamd
- also it returns an EX_NOTLEARNED (6) if learn/unlearn has been unsuccessfully 
due to a pherhaps already learned/unlearned message
- if learning takes place and an error takes place (e.g. protocol disagreement, 
due to old spamd) then an EX_UNAVAILABLE (69) will be triggered
- if SPAMC_CHECK_ONLY (-c) or SPAMC_REPORT_IFSPAM or SPAMC_REPORT or 
SPAMC_SYMBOLS are combined with SPAMC_LEARN then a log message error will be 
printed (if specified -l) and spamc exits.

Since i've discovered no more errors in the spamc-part, would it be possible to 
include it into the 3.1 trunk?

To Michael:
Did you get on with the spamd part? I've discovered no errors since I've 
integrated your spamd patch. I don't want to bother you, but pherhaps this 
could 
also be applied to the current trunk!? I think this bug addresses a long 
awaited 
feature as every week a question will be submitted to the spamassassin user 
forum about that.

A CLA has already been submitted.

Greetings
NicoP.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

Reply via email to