Re: SA Upgrade from 3.1.8 -> 3.2.1 via CPAN fails
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 04:45:56AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: > This looks to be a known bug in 3.2.1, make test fails when run as root, > which inherently breaks all CPAN installs. > > http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5510 This should have been fixed though if you read the bug history, shown now as Status: RESOLVED, Resolution: FIXED. However, a CPAN installation attempted a few moments ago failed as per the original bug report. Presumably, Justin's committed patch of 18 Jun 2007 hasn't yet made its way to the CPAN servers? -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problem installing SA 3.2.0 via CPAN on OPenSuSE 10.2 or SLES 10
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 01:12:42PM +0200, Robert Schetterer wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Anthony Edwards schrieb: > > On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 02:37:34PM +0100, Stephen Carter wrote: > >> Hi guys, > >> > >> I've tried to install SA 3.2.0 on both an unpatched and fully patched > >> versions of OpenSuSE 10.2 and SLES 10 via CPAN but on all attempts I > >> receive the following errors during one of the test phases. It would be > >> great if someone could help me out. > >> > >> t/spamc_z...Not found: firstline = Return-Path: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> # Failed test 2 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 > >> Not found: subj = Subject: There yours for FREE! > >> # Failed test 3 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #2 > >> Not found: endsinnums = TEST_ENDSNUMS > >> # Failed test 4 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #3 > >> Not found: noreal = TEST_NOREALNAME > >> # Failed test 5 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #4 > >> Not found: lastline = This must be the very last line > >> # Failed test 6 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #5 > >> Not found: flag = X-Spam-Flag: YES > >> # Failed test 7 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #6 > >> Not found: stars = X-Spam-Level: ** > >> # Failed test 8 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #7 > >> Not found: status = X-Spam-Status: Yes, score= > >> # Failed test 9 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #8 > >> Output can be examined in: log/d.spamc_z/out.1 > >> t/spamc_z...FAILED tests 2-9 > >> Failed 8/9 tests, 11.11% okay > > > > Same result here, attempting to update via cpan on Ubuntu 6.06.1 LTS. > > > I installed/updated spamassasin 3.2.0 on opensuse 10.2 days ago > downloaded the src rpm from suse an rebuilded it , youre right after > install there are still some perl modules left for manual install from > cpan , but i could managed them all > and its working nice now In fact, the fix for the above, on Ubuntu 6.06.1 LTS at least, is simply to install the zlib1g-dev package: http://packages.ubuntu.com/dapper/libdevel/zlib1g-dev After which, SpamAssassin 3.2.0 builds and installs successfully using the cpan method. The equivalent openSUSE 10.2 package appears to be zlib-devel-1.2.3-33.i586.rpm: http://www.novell.com/products/linuxpackages/opensuse/zlib-devel.html -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problem installing SA 3.2.0 via CPAN on OPenSuSE 10.2 or SLES 10
On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 02:37:34PM +0100, Stephen Carter wrote: > Hi guys, > > I've tried to install SA 3.2.0 on both an unpatched and fully patched > versions of OpenSuSE 10.2 and SLES 10 via CPAN but on all attempts I receive > the following errors during one of the test phases. It would be great if > someone could help me out. > > t/spamc_z...Not found: firstline = Return-Path: [EMAIL > PROTECTED] > # Failed test 2 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 > Not found: subj = Subject: There yours for FREE! > # Failed test 3 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #2 > Not found: endsinnums = TEST_ENDSNUMS > # Failed test 4 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #3 > Not found: noreal = TEST_NOREALNAME > # Failed test 5 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #4 > Not found: lastline = This must be the very last line > # Failed test 6 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #5 > Not found: flag = X-Spam-Flag: YES > # Failed test 7 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #6 > Not found: stars = X-Spam-Level: ** > # Failed test 8 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #7 > Not found: status = X-Spam-Status: Yes, score= > # Failed test 9 in t/SATest.pm at line 633 fail #8 > Output can be examined in: log/d.spamc_z/out.1 > t/spamc_z...FAILED tests 2-9 > Failed 8/9 tests, 11.11% okay Same result here, attempting to update via cpan on Ubuntu 6.06.1 LTS. -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Perl incompatibility causes spamc/spamd to fail
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 04:50:49PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'm running SpamAssassin 3.0.4 on a SuSE Linux 8.2 box. > > Ever since I ugraded to SA 3.0.1 and in all subsequent revs, SA installs > just fine, the spamassassin binary works perfectly, but spamc/spamd fail > miserably. > > spamd starts fine and ps ax shows it running fine. However when I run > spamc: > > cat SpamMessage | spamc -x > > I get a return status of 74 (EX_IOERR) and no spam headers inserted in the > message on stdout. > > If I run > > cat SpamMessage | spamassassin > > everything works perfectly, and spam headers are inserted in the message > on stdout. > > Looking at /var/log/mail, I noticed the following: > > Jun 17 16:30:55 pannier spamd[18747]: error: &Time::HiRes::constant not > defined > at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.0/i586-linux-thread-multi/Time/HiRes.pm line 25._ > Illegal seek, continuing > Jun 17 16:31:00 pannier spamd[18748]: error: &Time::HiRes::constant not > defined > at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.0/i586-linux-thread-multi/Time/HiRes.pm line 25._ > Illegal seek, continuing > > There seems to be a perl incompatibiluty problem here. Is there any way of > just fixing this, without possibly killing my entire system? I am very > reluctant to update perl overall because of worries it could break all > sorts of unexpected applications. This is a known issue in fact, explained at: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general/56501 If you edit /etc/init.d/spamd to change the line: SPAMD_BIN=/usr/sbin/spamd To read: SPAMD_BIN=/usr/bin/spamd Then stop and restart spamd and use the YaST Runlevel Editor to configure spamd to automatically start in runlevels 3 & 5, that should provide a resolution for you. -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fetchmail and Spamassassin together?
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 07:25:08AM -0400, Neal D. Becker wrote: > Rob Blomquist wrote: > > > This is all precipitated by the volume of spam I receive, and the time it > > takes for KMail to pipe it all through SA. I really like some of the more > > intensive filters like blacklist, but they take down my use of Kmail for a > > minute or so, bugging the pop tarts out of me. > > > > I am one heck of a novice at MTAs but I would like to use fetchmail to > > grab my mail from my ISP, then have it dropped to /var/log/spool and allow > > SA to check it all out. > > > > Then, once it is all checked, run Kmail to pick it up, filter the spam > > from the ham, and move on. > > > > Is this possible? Do I need a wrapper script? Or can I just get fetchmail > > to run it for me? > > > > Rob > > > > > > I do this: > > fetchmail -> maildrop -> SA -> maildir Ditto for my personal mail setup, and it works a treat. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> cat .forward | /usr/local/bin/maildrop [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> cat .fetchmailrc poll pop3.nildram.co.uk proto pop3 user "topflite" password "***" limit 10 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> cat .mailfilter DEFAULT="Mail/inbox" logfile ".maildroplog" `reformail -D 8192 .duplicate.cache` if ( $RETURNCODE == 0 ) exit if ($SIZE < 10) xfilter "spamc" if (/^X-Spam-Flag: YES/) to Mail/junk (etc) -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Preferred DNSBL
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 10:50:21AM -0700, jdow wrote: > Recently dsbl blocked a whole Earthlink smtp server as a spam relay > leading to, no doubt, an incredible number of false positive rejections, > including some of my email to this list. Generally, those using dsbl.org lists to block or reject mail for or on behalf of large organisations tend to so only on the basis of list.dsbl.org, and not multihop.dsbl.org & unconfirmed.dsbl.org. dsbl.org themselves say: Note that the multihop and unconfirmed lists are very aggressive and have the potential for a high level of false positives. In our opinion these lists are best used as part of a scoring system, such as spamassassin and not for outright blocking of email. http://dsbl.org/usage -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SA 3.0 upgrade bug and fix (spamd reporting to log, but not tagging messages)
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 06:12:53PM +0100, Anthony Edwards wrote: > On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 03:04:58AM +0100, Anthony Edwards wrote: > > > I removed all SpamAssassin files earlier this evening and re-installed > > using cpan. With hindsight, I believe I could have simply done what > > you have suggested above. I run a SuSE 8.2 system, and persuading > > manual configuration of startup script changes to co-exist with SuSE's > > YaST tool created configurations is far from trivial, so I shall be > > sticking with /usr/bin/spamassassin for the time being. > > In fact, it's easy, or would be if the script at: > > http://kmail.kde.org/unsupported/spamd > > Actually worked properly on SuSE 8.2. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem > to, quite. If it did, it would be a simple matter of downloading and > copying it to the /etc/init.d directory, changing file permissions, > then running YaST and configuring spamd to start in runlevels 3 & > 5 using the Runlevel Editor. The answer to this, of course (on a SuSE 8.2 system at least) was to download: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/8.2/suse/src/spamassassin-2.50-14.src.rpm Then, do: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/software> rpm2cpio spamassassin-2.50-14.src.rpm | cpio -iv init.spamd Next, edit init.spamd to change the line: SPAMD_BIN=/usr/sbin/spamd To read: SPAMD_BIN=/usr/bin/spamd Then, copy the resultant changed file [1] to /etc/init.d/spamd, and next use the YaST Runlevel Editor to start spamd in runlevels 3 & 5. Working perfectly now. [1] http://www.805.org.uk/spamd.txt -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SA 3.0 TRAP
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 02:37:31PM -0400, Kris Deugau wrote: > Justin Mason wrote: > > Yeah -- this is almost definitely something to do with SuSE's > > packaging of either perl (if it uses the defaults from > > ExtUtils::MakeMaker) or SpamAssassin itself (if its rpm spec moves > > the file around as Debian does). > > Actually, for any "real" package manager (ie, rpm or dpkg), upgrading a > package should remove all old files as a part of the upgrade. The issue related to SuSE is that previously, one has been able to install the SuSE default .rpm package, and then subsequently upgrade using cpan without removing the old package first since the old binaries and entire contents of /usr/share/spamassassin/ have been overwritten by that process. SuSE are unlike Debian (for instance) in that they don't release (with one or two exceptions) upgraded packages other than to address security vulnerabilites, so to upgrade to a more recent version of any particular application cannot generally be done with a SuSE .rpm. For those that primarily maintain and administer their system using YaST, manual configuration of startup scripts etc is also somewhat difficult so it can be of benefit to rely on SuSE's copy of /etc/init.d/spamd - for example, the one recommended in spamd's README.SuSE file doesn't actually work, on SuSE 8.2 at least. So, installing the default SuSE .rpm that came with one's version and then subsequently upgrading one's SpamAssassin using cpan has benefits there too. -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SA 3.0 upgrade bug and fix (spamd reporting to log, but not tagging messages)
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 03:04:58AM +0100, Anthony Edwards wrote: > I removed all SpamAssassin files earlier this evening and re-installed > using cpan. With hindsight, I believe I could have simply done what > you have suggested above. I run a SuSE 8.2 system, and persuading > manual configuration of startup script changes to co-exist with SuSE's > YaST tool created configurations is far from trivial, so I shall be > sticking with /usr/bin/spamassassin for the time being. In fact, it's easy, or would be if the script at: http://kmail.kde.org/unsupported/spamd Actually worked properly on SuSE 8.2. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to, quite. If it did, it would be a simple matter of downloading and copying it to the /etc/init.d directory, changing file permissions, then running YaST and configuring spamd to start in runlevels 3 & 5 using the Runlevel Editor. -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SA 3.0 TRAP
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 01:30:19AM -0800, John Andersen wrote: > If you are thinking about installing Spamassasin 3.0 PAY ATTENTION: > > If you haven't been reading this list carefully you will > have missed the fact that spamd has been moved > from /usr/sbin/ to /usr/bin . However, the old version remains > in /usr/sbin which is often where your scripts expect to find it. > (At least in SuSE > 8 it is so). > > Easiest fix it to rm the one in /usr/sbin and link the new one > there, and then go to /etc/sysconfig/spamd and remove the > -a argument in that file. Alternatively, perhaps the released version could be amended so that spamd is installed in /usr/sbin rather than /usr/bin, which is I understand what the Debian package maintainers have done (that wouldn't assist users who have already upgraded, of course). -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SA 3.0 upgrade bug and fix (spamd reporting to log, but not tagging messages)
On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 09:12:18PM +, Brian L. Gentry wrote: > The fix is obvious and simple: Shut down spamd, start it from the command > line: /usr/bin/spamd -c -d . Test it. Once you've verified that it's > working > again, modify your spamd startup script to use the new location for spamd. I > also removed /usr/sbin/spamd for good measure, since it's not used any more. > > This took a while to track down and caused us some grief here. I hope this > helps save someone else the hassle. Any chance this could be put into the > upgrade notes file ? This is an excellent idea, and thanks for your note earlier today. That is indeed it seems the cause of the issue, which must be causing a good deal of scratching of heads, I would have thought. I removed all SpamAssassin files earlier this evening and re-installed using cpan. With hindsight, I believe I could have simply done what you have suggested above. I run a SuSE 8.2 system, and persuading manual configuration of startup script changes to co-exist with SuSE's YaST tool created configurations is far from trivial, so I shall be sticking with /usr/bin/spamassassin for the time being. Incidentally, a co-worker who runs a Debian system tells me that the Debian package maintainer has overcome the issue by creating the Debian SpamAssassin 3.0.0 package in such a way that spamd is installed in /usr/sbin/ rather than /usr/bin, as with previous versions. -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SA 3.0 bugs ?
On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 01:51:54PM +0100, Anthony Edwards wrote:
> I have also been unable to persuade spamd to add spamassassin headers,
> as per my posting of last night to the list. Running spamassassin, in
> contrast, seems to work properly (which seems to rule out it being a
> local configuration issue?).
I have just stopped spamd, removed ~/.spamassasin completely, and
removed all instances of local* in /etc/mail/spamassassin so that no
old configuration files from the previous version (2.64) could be
affecting things.
Next, I restarted spamd, and fetched some mail with spamc being called
by .mailfilter (maildrop configuration file) as normal. An example
of the result (from /var/log/mail.info):
Sep 23 13:58:29 ultra spamd[8586]: processing message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for anthony:500.
Sep 23 13:58:30 ultra spamd[8574]: identified spam (12.4/5.0) for
anthony:500 in 3.9 seconds, 15975 bytes.
Sep 23 13:58:30 ultra postfix/local[8331]: 7BB7033DD6:
to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
orig_to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, relay=local, delay=44, status=sent
("|/usr/local/bin/maildrop")
spamd apparently identified the mail as spam, with a score of 12.4.
However, no spamassasin headers were added, and as a result my
.mailfilter line:
if (/^X-Spam-Flag: YES/)
to Mail/junk
Had no effect (of course), and the mail was delivered by maildrop to the
default mailbox.
--
Anthony Edwards
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SA 3.0 bugs ?
On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 02:21:43PM +0200, Thomas Richter wrote: > hi, > I got only clean messages with -1.1 > and in /var/log/messages from spamd: > Use of uninitialized value in concatenation (.) or string at > /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/NoMailAudit.pm line 184. > Use of uninitialized value in pattern match (m//) at > /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm line > 875. I am getting similar results in testing: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/software/Mail-SpamAssassin-3.0.0> spamc < sample-nonspam.txt > nonspam.out [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/software/Mail-SpamAssassin-3.0.0> spamc < sample-spam.txt > spam.out ultra:/var/log # tail -n 200 mail.info [...] Sep 23 12:07:28 ultra spamd[7939]: processing message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for anthony:500. Sep 23 12:07:29 ultra spamd[7939]: Use of uninitialized value in concatenation (.) or string at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/Mail/SpamAssassin/NoMailAudit.pm line 184. Sep 23 12:07:29 ultra spamd[7939]: Use of uninitialized value in pattern match (m//) at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm line 875. Sep 23 12:07:29 ultra spamd[7939]: clean message (-2.6/5.0) for anthony:500 in 1.0 seconds, 6494 bytes. Sep 23 12:07:45 ultra spamd[7935]: connection from localhost [127.0.0.1] at port 1485 Sep 23 12:07:45 ultra spamd[7943]: info: setuid to anthony succeeded Sep 23 12:07:45 ultra spamd[7943]: processing message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for anthony:500. Sep 23 12:07:45 ultra spamd[7943]: Use of uninitialized value in concatenation (.) or string at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/Mail/SpamAssassin/NoMailAudit.pm line 184. Sep 23 12:07:45 ultra spamd[7943]: Use of uninitialized value in pattern match (m//) at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm line 875. Sep 23 12:07:45 ultra spamd[7943]: clean message (-4.5/5.0) for anthony:500 in 0.4 seconds, 799 bytes. I have also been unable to persuade spamd to add spamassassin headers, as per my posting of last night to the list. Running spamassassin, in contrast, seems to work properly (which seems to rule out it being a local configuration issue?). -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
3.0.0 upgrade - no headers being added
I have upgraded from 2.64 to 3.0.0 using CPAN. All has gone well, and spamd can be started: ultra:/etc/mail/spamassassin # /etc/init.d/spamd start Starting spamddone The logs confirm that this was successful: ultra:/var/log # tail -n 200 mail.info [...] Sep 23 00:49:48 ultra spamd[4808]: server started on port 783/tcp (running version 3.0.0) ps aux confirms that the daemon is running: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> ps aux | grep spamd root 4808 1.5 5.7 26212 21976 ? S00:49 0:02 /usr/bin/perl -T -w /usr/sbin/spamd -d -c anthony 4813 0.0 0.1 3540 560 pts/3S00:52 0:00 grep spamd Testing using a known spam email, not previously run through SpamAssassin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Mail/junk/cur> spamc < 1095894767.4440_1.ultra\:2\,S > test The logs indicate that this email was correctly identified as spam: ultra:/var/log # tail -n 200 mail.info [...] Sep 23 01:01:35 ultra spamd[4943]: identified spam (10.5/5.0) for anthony:500 in 4.6 seconds, 2184 bytes. However, no SpamAssassin headers or tags were added, and the email remained unaltered. A file size comparison to confirm this: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Mail/junk/cur> ls -l total 8 -rw---1 anthony users2184 2004-09-22 23:49 1095894767.4440_1.ultra:2,S -rw-r--r--1 anthony users2184 2004-09-23 01:01 test This is preventing the use of SpamAssassin to filter mail, of course. What is needed to get SpamAssassin to add its usual tags and headers, as before? TIA. -- Anthony Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
