https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6884
Mark Martinec <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|FIXED |--- --- Comment #6 from Mark Martinec <[email protected]> --- I'm beginning to understand the issue. These are relevant DNS queries from the failing test: $ host -t A uribl-example-a.com.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org uribl-example-a.com.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org has address 127.0.0.2 $ host -t A uribl-example-b.com.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org uribl-example-b.com.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org has address 127.0.0.4 $ host -t A uribl-example-c.com.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org uribl-example-c.com.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org has address 127.0.0.6 $ host -t A 98.3.137.144.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org 98.3.137.144.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org has address 127.0.0.2 and here are the corresponding rules from the test: urirhssub X_URIBL_IPSONLY dnsbltest.spamassassin.org. A 2 body X_URIBL_IPSONLY eval:check_uridnsbl('X_URIBL_IPSONLY') describe X_URIBL_IPSONLY X_URIBL_IPSONLY tflags X_URIBL_IPSONLY net ips_only urirhssub X_URIBL_DOMSONLY dnsbltest.spamassassin.org. A 4 body X_URIBL_DOMSONLY eval:check_uridnsbl('X_URIBL_DOMSONLY') describe X_URIBL_DOMSONLY X_URIBL_DOMSONLY tflags X_URIBL_DOMSONLY net domains_only Note that both the uribl-example-a.com.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org as well as the 98.3.137.144.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org produce a reply 127.0.0.2, which matches the '2' subrule filter of X_URIBL_IPSONLY, so this rule collects both the 'uribl-example-a' and the '98.3.137.144' as a rule sub-description - but there is room for only one answer, so whichever comes last(?) stays there. It is a pure luck or a timing thing (or maybe a Perl version) if Jenkins happens to always return the same result. In my case I see one or the other result with about the same probability (perl 5.17.7). I see two open issues here: - allow multiple hits to show in the sub-description (this is already mentioned in the code as a TODO); - does the uribl-example-a.com.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org with its 127.0.0.2 really merit the hit on X_URIBL_IPSONLY (despite a match on a filter), considering its tflag ips_only ? Some determinism needs to be introduced here before this ticket can be closed, although it probably isn't a blocker, as the above test case is somewhat synthetic and should rarely occur in practice. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
