Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Kevin A. McGrail kmcgr...@pccc.com wrote: On 2/10/2015 9:13 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: I would guess I missed the cutoff for yesterday's masscheck and tomorrow's will include it. Rule gen just finished and the update does include the fix if you want to confirm. Looks good KAM. Received the updated 25_spf.cf files ~5 hours ago and no problems since then. Thanks! -Jim P.
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Kevin A. McGrail kmcgr...@pccc.com wrote: On 2/10/2015 9:00 AM, Jim Popovitch wrote: On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Kevin A. McGrail kmcgr...@pccc.com wrote: On 2/9/2015 4:12 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: what is that below introduced with tonights update and get triggered now for every single mail and why does such things not automatically get caught before push? It was part of a commit on Jan 30, http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/spamassassin/commits/190790, that likely needs a has_ function for a can() if encapsulation if you aren't using the latest trunk to avoid warnings. Working on a patch now and a fix to the rules. Hi KAM, Still seeing these, even after today's update, Can you grab the 25_spf.cf from http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rules/25_spf.cf?view=co and see if that works? Confirmed, Yes, that works (3.003002 on Debian Wheezy). Thanks! Then I'll hope the rule update hits tomorrow. There is some vagueness to my understanding of exactly how long rules take from start to finish to go outbound. There are some emergency rule generation procedures if someone wants to help the project. I'm interested. Let me know how to begin. I would guess I missed the cutoff for yesterday's masscheck and tomorrow's will include it. Ahh, that makes sense. Thanks again, -Jim P.
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
On 2/10/2015 9:27 AM, Jim Popovitch wrote: Then I'll hope the rule update hits tomorrow. There is some vagueness to my understanding of exactly how long rules take from start to finish to go outbound. There are some emergency rule generation procedures if someone wants to help the project. I'm interested. Let me know how to begin. Well we always need volunteers and not just programmers. Rule writers, documentation cleanup, wiki help, people to go over bugzilla, people to sysadmin the various servers. Feel free to send me a note off-list with your skills and ideas where you can help! regards, KAM
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
Hello KAM. Unfortuntately I am still getting the same warning messages with the new 25_spf.cf. It looks like that the check part: if can(Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF::has_check_for_spf_errors) (...) endif is ignored. Could it be an effect introduced by the sa-compile step? The output of the 'rules compilation' looked fine to me, though. If it can help, I am using Debian Wheezy with Perl 5.14.2 and SA version 3.004000 (from the backports archives). Best regards, Matteo On 10.02.2015 15:13, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Can you grab the 25_spf.cf from http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rules/25_spf.cf?view=co and see if that works? Then I'll hope the rule update hits tomorrow. There is some vagueness to my understanding of exactly how long rules take from start to finish to go outbound. There are some emergency rule generation procedures if someone wants to help the project. I would guess I missed the cutoff for yesterday's masscheck and tomorrow's will include it. Regards, KAM
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
Uh,ohsorry my bad. I did it try the modifed ruleset on a test installation without the Rule2XSBody plugin enabled. With the plugin enabled (and after restarting Amavis) it looks like those warning messages are not there anymore. Thanks a lot for the fix! Regards, Matteo On 10.02.2015 16:06, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Interesting idea. Axb convinced me not to bother with rules Regards, KAM
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
On 2/10/2015 9:13 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: I would guess I missed the cutoff for yesterday's masscheck and tomorrow's will include it. Rule gen just finished and the update does include the fix if you want to confirm. Regards, KAM
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Kevin A. McGrail kmcgr...@pccc.com wrote: On 2/9/2015 4:12 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: what is that below introduced with tonights update and get triggered now for every single mail and why does such things not automatically get caught before push? It was part of a commit on Jan 30, http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/spamassassin/commits/190790, that likely needs a has_ function for a can() if encapsulation if you aren't using the latest trunk to avoid warnings. Working on a patch now and a fix to the rules. Hi KAM, Still seeing these, even after today's update, Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: rules: failed to run T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR test, skipping: Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: (Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1159) line 19, GEN34 line 36. Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: ) Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: rules: failed to run T_SPF_TEMPERROR test, skipping: Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: (Can't locate object method check_for_spf_temperror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1159) line 639, GEN34 line 36. Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: ) Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: rules: failed to run T_SPF_PERMERROR test, skipping: Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: (Can't locate object method check_for_spf_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1159) line 809, GEN34 line 36. Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: ) Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: rules: failed to run T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR test, skipping: Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: (Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_temperror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1159) line 1154, GEN34 line 36. Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: ) Feb 10 13:57:25 svr5 spamd[3922]: spamd: clean message (-0.1/5.0) for test:106 in 0.2 seconds, 1642 bytes. What can we do to help fix this? -Jim P.
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
On 2/10/2015 9:54 AM, Matteo Dessalvi wrote: Hello KAM. Unfortuntately I am still getting the same warning messages with the new 25_spf.cf. It looks like that the check part: if can(Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::SPF::has_check_for_spf_errors) (...) endif is ignored. Could it be an effect introduced by the sa-compile step? The output of the 'rules compilation' looked fine to me, though. Interesting idea. Axb convinced me not to bother with rules compilation. If you don't compile, does it warn still? If it can help, I am using Debian Wheezy with Perl 5.14.2 and SA version 3.004000 (from the backports archives). Regards, KAM
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
On 2/10/2015 9:00 AM, Jim Popovitch wrote: On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Kevin A. McGrail kmcgr...@pccc.com wrote: On 2/9/2015 4:12 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: what is that below introduced with tonights update and get triggered now for every single mail and why does such things not automatically get caught before push? It was part of a commit on Jan 30, http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/spamassassin/commits/190790, that likely needs a has_ function for a can() if encapsulation if you aren't using the latest trunk to avoid warnings. Working on a patch now and a fix to the rules. Hi KAM, Still seeing these, even after today's update, Can you grab the 25_spf.cf from http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rules/25_spf.cf?view=co and see if that works? Then I'll hope the rule update hits tomorrow. There is some vagueness to my understanding of exactly how long rules take from start to finish to go outbound. There are some emergency rule generation procedures if someone wants to help the project. I would guess I missed the cutoff for yesterday's masscheck and tomorrow's will include it. Regards, KAM
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
Hi all. I am getting the same errors. I am running SA through Amavis but I guess it does not matter in this case. Is there a way of fixing those errors, apart from disabling the rules from 25_spf.cf? SA version: 3.4.0 - Perl 5.14.2 (Debian Wheezy - 64 bit) Log snapshot: Feb 9 10:42:13 lxmtin2 amavis[6411]: (06411-09) _WARN: rules: failed to run T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR test, skipping:\n\t(Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1329) line 19, GEN38 line 4061.\n) Feb 9 10:42:13 lxmtin2 amavis[6411]: (06411-09) _WARN: rules: failed to run T_SPF_TEMPERROR test, skipping:\n\t(Can't locate object method check_for_spf_temperror via package Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1329) line 664, GEN38 line 4061.\n) Feb 9 10:42:13 lxmtin2 amavis[6411]: (06411-09) _WARN: rules: failed to run T_SPF_PERMERROR test, skipping:\n\t(Can't locate object method check_for_spf_permerror via package Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1329) line 841, GEN38 line 4061.\n) Feb 9 10:42:13 lxmtin2 amavis[6411]: (06411-09) _WARN: rules: failed to run T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR test, skipping:\n\t(Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_temperror via package Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1329) line 1226, GEN38 line 4061.\n) Best regards, Matteo On 09.02.2015 10:12, Reindl Harald wrote: what is that below introduced with tonights update and get triggered now for every single mail and why does such things not automatically get caught before push? score T_SPF_PERMERROR 0 score T_SPF_TEMPERROR 0 score T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR 0 score T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR 0 09-Feb-2015 05:35:10: SpamAssassin: Update processed successfully Feb 9 10:02:57 mail-gw spamd[9786]: spamd: server hit by SIGHUP, restarting Feb 9 10:02:57 mail-gw spamd[9786]: spamd: server socket closed, type IO::Socket::IP Feb 9 10:02:58 mail-gw spamd[9786]: rules: failed to run T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR test, skipping: Feb 9 10:02:58 mail-gw spamd[9786]: (Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1217) line 357. Feb 9 10:02:58 mail-gw spamd[9786]: ) Feb 9 10:03:00 mail-gw spamd[9786]: rules: failed to run T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR test, skipping: Feb 9 10:03:00 mail-gw spamd[9786]: (Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_temperror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1217) line 690. Feb 9 10:03:00 mail-gw spamd[9786]: ) Feb 9 10:03:00 mail-gw spamd[9786]: rules: failed to run T_SPF_PERMERROR test, skipping: Feb 9 10:03:00 mail-gw spamd[9786]: (Can't locate object method check_for_spf_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1217) line 1231. Feb 9 10:03:00 mail-gw spamd[9786]: ) Feb 9 10:03:00 mail-gw spamd[9786]: rules: failed to run T_SPF_TEMPERROR test, skipping: Feb 9 10:03:00 mail-gw spamd[9786]: (Can't locate object method check_for_spf_temperror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus at (eval 1217) line 2162. Feb 9 10:03:00 mail-gw spamd[9786]: ) Feb 9 10:03:00 mail-gw spamd[9786]: spamd: server started on IO::Socket::IP [127.0.0.1]:10028 (running version 3.4.0) Feb 9 10:03:00 mail-gw spamd[9786]: spamd: server pid: 9786
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
On 2/9/2015 4:12 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: what is that below introduced with tonights update and get triggered now for every single mail and why does such things not automatically get caught before push? It was part of a commit on Jan 30, http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/spamassassin/commits/190790, that likely needs a has_ function for a can() if encapsulation if you aren't using the latest trunk to avoid warnings. Working on a patch now and a fix to the rules. Regards, KAM
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
Am 09.02.2015 um 12:30 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail: On 2/9/2015 4:12 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: what is that below introduced with tonights update and get triggered now for every single mail and why does such things not automatically get caught before push? It was part of a commit on Jan 30, http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/spamassassin/commits/190790, that likely needs a has_ function for a can() if encapsulation if you aren't using the latest trunk to avoid warnings. Working on a patch now and a fix to the rules thanks! is there a timeline for a 3.4.1 GA release i remember rumours that it was planned around 2014/10 and did not hear anything after that - maybe this would make things easier (at least for users of distributions which not only backport) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Can't locate object method check_for_spf_helo_permerror via package Mail: [...]:SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus
On 2/9/2015 6:33 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 09.02.2015 um 12:30 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail: On 2/9/2015 4:12 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: what is that below introduced with tonights update and get triggered now for every single mail and why does such things not automatically get caught before push? It was part of a commit on Jan 30, http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/spamassassin/commits/190790, that likely needs a has_ function for a can() if encapsulation if you aren't using the latest trunk to avoid warnings. Working on a patch now and a fix to the rules thanks! is there a timeline for a 3.4.1 GA release i remember rumours that it was planned around 2014/10 and did not hear anything after that - maybe this would make things easier (at least for users of distributions which not only backport) I pulled an Rc1 but it got hung up on some bugs found in the release process. I still have a calendar reminder EVERY morning about it, though so it is not forgotten. There have been a TON of great changes going into trunk in the past few weeks, too. Regards, KAM
