Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: Missing Modules
Hello Noel, Monday, November 17, 2014, 1:42:35 AM, you wrote: NB In the context you quote - yes, NB but upon reading Harry's original - *no* it was not condescending (and he made a valid point) Been more tactful to make it a day earlier when I pondered- I'm tempted to try- yum install Mail-SPF, but all the differing advice here has made me wary. -- Best regards, Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Niamh, Saturday, November 15, 2014, 1:43:47 PM, you wrote: NH yum install Mail-SPF, but all the differing advice here has made me wary. No package Mail-SPF available. But http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch.rpm Installing : perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch Verifying : perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch Installed: perl-Mail-SPF.noarch 0:2.8.0-2.el6 Complete! Now for the other missing modules -- Best regards, Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk pgpIlalSsU1co.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Missing Modules
Am 16.11.2014 um 19:14 schrieb Niamh Holding: Saturday, November 15, 2014, 1:43:47 PM, you wrote: NH yum install Mail-SPF, but all the differing advice here has made me wary. No package Mail-SPF available. don't get me wrong but you need first to learn how to operate your OS because you can't expect a wrong package name to be solved, frankly you see the correct one in the link below [root@localhost:~]$ yum search perl | grep -i spf perl-Mail-SPF.noarch : Object-oriented implementation of Sender Policy Framework so yum install perl-Mail-SPF would have worked But http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch.rpm Installing : perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch Verifying : perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch Installed: perl-Mail-SPF.noarch 0:2.8.0-2.el6 Complete! Now for the other missing modules signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Reindl, Sunday, November 16, 2014, 6:19:03 PM, you wrote: RH don't get me wrong but you need first to learn how to operate your OS Condescending or what? -- Best regards, Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk pgpWVDlBzQqPf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Missing Modules
Am 16.11.2014 um 19:49 schrieb Niamh Holding: Hello Reindl, Sunday, November 16, 2014, 6:19:03 PM, you wrote: RH don't get me wrong but you need first to learn how to operate your OS Condescending or what? no, otherwise i would have not posted the yum command how to search perl packages (which you stripped from the quote) or would have noted in a condescending way that you even had the correct package name in your own post after manual download frankly i try to help you learn to help yourself on a sunday afternoon download packages you can have with a yum command via http bypasses any security (MITM as well as no gpg check otherwise happens in context of yum) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Reindl, Sunday, November 16, 2014, 6:54:05 PM, you wrote: RH download packages you can have with a yum command via http bypasses any RH security (MITM as well as no gpg check otherwise happens in context of yum) That's Axb told! -- Best regards, Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk pgp2QXGKriEeS.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: Missing Modules
On 17/11/2014 04:49, Niamh Holding wrote: WARNING: contains undecipherable part RH don't get me wrong but you need first to learn how to operate your OS Condescending or what? In the context you quote - yes, but upon reading Harry's original - *no* it was not condescending (and he made a valid point)
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Reindl, Friday, November 14, 2014, 7:51:23 PM, you wrote: install the epel-release package on CentOS - i would call that repo mandatory and it *never* collides with the base-repos repo id base epel extras rpmforge updates So back to yum to install? -- Best regards, Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Re: Missing Modules
Am 15.11.2014 um 09:59 schrieb Niamh Holding: Hello Reindl, Friday, November 14, 2014, 7:51:23 PM, you wrote: install the epel-release package on CentOS - i would call that repo mandatory and it *never* collides with the base-repos repo id base epel extras rpmforge updates So back to yum to install? in case of packages you need and available yes! * only download them and install by rpm without have the repo enabled will not update them in the future until you do by hand * if you have the repo enabled there is no point in download and use rpm instead yum and even if you download RPM's just use yum localinstall to slove dependencies if possible please read that package careful! http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Missing Modules
On 15.11.14 10:09, Reindl Harald wrote: in case of packages you need and available yes! * only download them and install by rpm without have the repo enabled will not update them in the future until you do by hand * if you have the repo enabled there is no point in download and use rpm instead yum and even if you download RPM's just use yum localinstall to slove dependencies if possible please read that package careful! http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories/ oh yes, security updates are for dummies... -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges.
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Axb, Friday, November 14, 2014, 7:32:17 PM, you wrote: What's the requiremenet? What does Perl Makefile.PL ask for? The output of perl Makefile.PL is in the root message, for example- NOTE: the optional Mail::SPF module is not installed. -- Best regards, Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Axb, Saturday, November 15, 2014, 11:21:51 AM, you wrote: By now, I assume you've solved the problem Well... I'm tempted to try- yum install Mail-SPF, but all the differing advice here has made me wary. -- Best regards, Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Re: Missing Modules
On 13.11.14 14:34, Giles Coochey wrote: I avoid the distribution perl completely, and use perlbrew and spamassassin 3.4.0 compiled from source, with a specific perlbrew perl version I avoid breaking the version of perl that comes with the system and can satisfy all dependencies via CPAN. how do you solve cases when any package from distribution needs perl or any of its modules? -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. 99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
Re: Missing Modules
On 14/11/2014 11:26, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: On 13.11.14 14:34, Giles Coochey wrote: I avoid the distribution perl completely, and use perlbrew and spamassassin 3.4.0 compiled from source, with a specific perlbrew perl version I avoid breaking the version of perl that comes with the system and can satisfy all dependencies via CPAN. how do you solve cases when any package from distribution needs perl or any of its modules? perlbrew (http://perlbrew.pl/) doesn't replace the system perl, it installs a different perl to a different path. You can run many different perl versions on the same system, but in any environment only one is active. -- Regards, Giles Coochey, CCNP, CCNA, CCNAS NetSecSpec Ltd +44 (0) 8444 780677 +44 (0) 7584 634135 http://www.coochey.net http://www.netsecspec.co.uk gi...@coochey.net smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Axb, Thursday, November 13, 2014, 2:21:44 PM, you wrote: If you need need extra modules which are not provided by Centos go to http://pkgs.repoforge.org/ Just looking, so don't shoot me but http://pkgs.repoforge.org/perl-Mail-SPF/ has nothing listed later than CentOS 5 PS I hate hotmail! -- Best regards, Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Re: Missing Modules
On 11/14/2014 08:18 PM, Niamh Holding wrote: Hello Axb, Thursday, November 13, 2014, 2:21:44 PM, you wrote: If you need need extra modules which are not provided by Centos go to http://pkgs.repoforge.org/ Just looking, so don't shoot me but http://pkgs.repoforge.org/perl-Mail-SPF/ has nothing listed later than CentOS 5 Now I'll be tarred and feathered by the rest :) I don't use SA's SPF stuff so you caught me here... My repoforge suggestion was mainly for Centos 5.x I'd go for http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch.rpm It installs without extra dependencies and plays nice with the C6 Core modules Anybody else got a better suggestion?
Re: Missing Modules
Am 14.11.2014 um 20:44 schrieb Axb: I don't use SA's SPF stuff so you caught me here... My repoforge suggestion was mainly for Centos 5.x I'd go for http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch.rpm It installs without extra dependencies and plays nice with the C6 Core modules Anybody else got a better suggestion? install the epel-release package on CentOS - i would call that repo mandatory and it *never* collides with the base-repos https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Missing Modules
On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote: OS CentOS 6.4 6.4 is old - centos 6.6 (do you seriously make a point of running old versions?) yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6 forget SA from YUM /Distro packages. - it ties you to, as Benny sez, precompiled problems :) So I'm building 3.4.0 from source but Makefile.PL reports missing moduiles, should these be installed from CPAN? *NO! hands off CPAN!!!* do you need ipV6 support? (probably not) build as is and get basic filtering to start with the extra modules you can add later... If you need need extra modules which are not provided by Centos go to http://pkgs.repoforge.org/ and yum install http://path-to-rpm/version-rpm
Re: Missing Modules
On 13.11.14 14:09, Niamh Holding wrote: OS CentOS 6.4 yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6 So I'm building 3.4.0 from source but Makefile.PL reports missing moduiles, should these be installed from CPAN? ...via yum, whenever possible -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. I just got lost in thought. It was unfamiliar territory.
Re: Missing Modules
On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote: OS CentOS 6.4 6.4 is old - centos 6.6 (do you seriously make a point of running old versions?) yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6 On 13.11.14 15:21, Axb wrote: forget SA from YUM /Distro packages. - it ties you to, as Benny sez, precompiled problems :) then he should forget CentOS and use LFS as Benny does... such distributions are here to avoid the dependency hell Niamh already ran into when he build SA from CPAN... -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. 42.7 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot.
Re: Missing Modules
On 13/11/2014 14:21, Axb wrote: On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote: OS CentOS 6.4 6.4 is old - centos 6.6 (do you seriously make a point of running old versions?) yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6 forget SA from YUM /Distro packages. - it ties you to, as Benny sez, precompiled problems :) So I'm building 3.4.0 from source but Makefile.PL reports missing moduiles, should these be installed from CPAN? *NO! hands off CPAN!!!* do you need ipV6 support? (probably not) build as is and get basic filtering to start with the extra modules you can add later... If you need need extra modules which are not provided by Centos go to http://pkgs.repoforge.org/ and yum install http://path-to-rpm/version-rpm I avoid the distribution perl completely, and use perlbrew and spamassassin 3.4.0 compiled from source, with a specific perlbrew perl version I avoid breaking the version of perl that comes with the system and can satisfy all dependencies via CPAN. -- Regards, Giles Coochey, CCNP, CCNA, CCNAS NetSecSpec Ltd +44 (0) 8444 780677 +44 (0) 7584 634135 http://www.coochey.net http://www.netsecspec.co.uk gi...@coochey.net smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Missing Modules
Am 13.11.2014 um 15:21 schrieb Axb: On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote: OS CentOS 6.4 6.4 is old - centos 6.6 (do you seriously make a point of running old versions?) yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6 forget SA from YUM /Distro packages. - it ties you to, as Benny sez, precompiled problems :) bad advise, in you are doing that throw away CentOS and just use Fedora, it has at least recent SA packages and a recent userland make upgrades/builds in the future easier grab the src.rpm, replace the tarball with the recent and take this as starting point - frankly that way you get first the list of all missing BuildRequires and at the end a recent SA RPM package with clear deps and a clean system doing that for apache, mysql, php, postfix, dovecot, dbmail, mod_security and a lot of other packages for many years to override distro packages without break the system over time signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Missing Modules
On 11/13/2014 03:35 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote: OS CentOS 6.4 6.4 is old - centos 6.6 (do you seriously make a point of running old versions?) yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6 On 13.11.14 15:21, Axb wrote: forget SA from YUM /Distro packages. - it ties you to, as Benny sez, precompiled problems :) then he should forget CentOS and use LFS as Benny does... such distributions are here to avoid the dependency hell Niamh already ran into when he build SA from CPAN... installing SA from source has never been a problem with Centos, as long as you don't mix with an older rpm setup. It's safe practice to get the extra SINGEL packages from repoforge which has never caused issues with Centos. It's the CPAN console which causes dependency hell.
Re: Missing Modules
On 11/13/2014 03:34 PM, Giles Coochey wrote: I avoid the distribution perl completely, and use perlbrew and spamassassin 3.4.0 compiled from source, with a specific perlbrew perl version I avoid breaking the version of perl that comes with the system and can satisfy all dependencies via CPAN. becuase you know what you're doingit works for you, d'ya now what I mean?
Re: Missing Modules
On 11/13/2014 9:51 AM, Axb wrote: On 11/13/2014 03:34 PM, Giles Coochey wrote: I avoid the distribution perl completely, and use perlbrew and spamassassin 3.4.0 compiled from source, with a specific perlbrew perl version I avoid breaking the version of perl that comes with the system and can satisfy all dependencies via CPAN. becuase you know what you're doingit works for you, d'ya now what I mean? I disagree. I often tell people to put a screwdriver near the server and convince it you will dismantle it AND you don't know how to rebuild it. Keeps the server on it's toes far better than if it thinks we know what we're doing... Regards, KAM
Re: Missing Modules
On 11/13/2014 03:42 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 13.11.2014 um 15:21 schrieb Axb: On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote: OS CentOS 6.4 6.4 is old - centos 6.6 (do you seriously make a point of running old versions?) yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6 forget SA from YUM /Distro packages. - it ties you to, as Benny sez, precompiled problems :) bad advise, in you are doing that throw away CentOS and just use Fedora, it has at least recent SA packages and a recent userland make upgrades/builds in the future easier grab the src.rpm, replace the tarball with the recent and take this as starting point - frankly that way you get first the list of all missing BuildRequires and at the end a recent SA RPM package with clear deps and a clean system doing that for apache, mysql, php, postfix, dovecot, dbmail, mod_security and a lot of other packages for many years to override distro packages without break the system over time blah, blah, blah... I'm trying to save the guy's ass so he gets a working server with least effort and you're suggesting he change distro, make RPMs when he already has trouble deciding if optional packages ar required or not? Lets be real... Pls stay in your hole and allow me to get this guy off this thread.
Re: Missing Modules
Am 13.11.2014 um 15:55 schrieb Axb: On 11/13/2014 03:42 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 13.11.2014 um 15:21 schrieb Axb: On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote: OS CentOS 6.4 6.4 is old - centos 6.6 (do you seriously make a point of running old versions?) yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6 forget SA from YUM /Distro packages. - it ties you to, as Benny sez, precompiled problems :) bad advise, in you are doing that throw away CentOS and just use Fedora, it has at least recent SA packages and a recent userland make upgrades/builds in the future easier grab the src.rpm, replace the tarball with the recent and take this as starting point - frankly that way you get first the list of all missing BuildRequires and at the end a recent SA RPM package with clear deps and a clean system doing that for apache, mysql, php, postfix, dovecot, dbmail, mod_security and a lot of other packages for many years to override distro packages without break the system over time blah, blah, blah... I'm trying to save the guy's ass so he gets a working server with least effort least effort *now* but in 3 years on that machine... and you're suggesting he change distro no, i just said if you bypass the package management, bring manual downloaded packages from unsafe 3rd party repos if you enable them unconditional in the mix youre defeating the whole purpose of RHEL make RPMs when he already has trouble deciding if optional packages ar required or not? Lets be real... rebuild the src.rpm with a new tarball answers that question because it specifies dependecies, even for the build itself Pls stay in your hole wow and allow me to get this guy off this thread so allow me to make clear that bypass the package managagement over the long may not be a good idea - building a RPM the first time may take longer but it keeps your setup maintainable for many years there is a difference between *you* as upstream developer knowing all the pieces, dependencies and programming language very well and a ordinary enduser signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Axb, Thursday, November 13, 2014, 2:21:44 PM, you wrote: (do you seriously make a point of running old versions?) If it ain't broke don't mess with it! Given that the other server is now dead after the suggested yum update :( Dead as in booting up from a spare disk in the raid assay which seems to be abot 2 years out of date, it's on its way back from the data centre. -- Best regards, Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Re: Missing Modules
On 11/13/2014 04:22 PM, Niamh Holding wrote: Hello Axb, Thursday, November 13, 2014, 2:21:44 PM, you wrote: (do you seriously make a point of running old versions?) If it ain't broke don't mess with it! what about security updates? Given that the other server is now dead after the suggested yum update :( Dead as in booting up from a spare disk in the raid assay which seems to be abot 2 years out of date, it's on its way back from the data centre. Dead as box on autopilot for as long as luck is with you... A spare array disk should only be a crutch till you replace the original disk.. simple BCP. Whatever...
Re: Missing Modules
On 11/13/2014 04:17 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: least effort *now* but in 3 years on that machine... that gives the victim enough time to learn the process and apply to a new setup... and you're suggesting he change distro no, i just said if you bypass the package management, bring manual downloaded packages from unsafe 3rd party repos if you enable them unconditional in the mix youre defeating the whole purpose of RHEL afaik, repoforge is far from unsafe - they have never broken a Centos setup and don't add extra dependemncies as some other repos do. make RPMs when he already has trouble deciding if optional packages ar required or not? Lets be real... rebuild the src.rpm with a new tarball answers that question because it specifies dependecies, even for the build itself at this point, this is way too complicated to do as a hand holding job over a mailing list. so allow me to make clear that bypass the package managagement over the long may not be a good idea - building a RPM the first time may take longer but it keeps your setup maintainable for many years I see your point, but I don't think it's the right moment to sugest a change in strategy... there is a difference between *you* as upstream developer knowing all the pieces, dependencies and programming language very well and a ordinary enduser I'm an ordinary end user - my advice was given based on what I know works with least long term pain and least steep learning curve. We don't have to argue or agree on some strategy, we just need to finish a hand holding job so the lady can start a weekend knowing the box is tagging spam.
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Axb, Thursday, November 13, 2014, 3:40:53 PM, you wrote: the lady can start a weekend knowing the box is tagging spam. First I have to get the damned ISP to stop blocking port 53 so the world knows where to send the spam. Most of yesterday was spent trying to work out why DNS was working from the LAN but not outside; tests established that the DNS requests weren't reaching the Zywall here so I innocently asked if there was upstream blocking of port 53 No was the replay at first this morning and only later did try admit that they were in fact blocking. But an ISP's system policies are not really for this list. -- Best regards, Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Axb, Thursday, November 13, 2014, 3:29:00 PM, you wrote: what about security updates? Bash and ssl were addressed when announced. A spare array disk should only be a crutch till you replace the original disk.. simple BCP. It's not a crutch it's booting up to how the server was 2 years ago.. That's why the server is on its way home. -- Best regards, Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Re: Missing Modules
On November 13, 2014 3:55:05 PM Axb axb.li...@gmail.com wrote: Pls stay in your hole and allow me to get this guy off this thread. http://www.centos.org/ seem centos 7 is there now, but its still a problem if there is no maintainers of spamassassin there, rule updates with iso files, hmm
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Benny, Thursday, November 13, 2014, 4:29:32 PM, you wrote: if there is no maintainers of spamassassin there That's why I build from source, I'm not aware od a 3.4.0 rpm either. -- Best regards, Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Re: Missing Modules
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: I disagree. I often tell people to put a screwdriver near the server and convince it you will dismantle it AND you don't know how to rebuild it. Keeps the server on it's toes far better than if it thinks we know what we're doing... That and put your photo in the case so it thinks you're watching it. -- John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ jhar...@impsec.orgFALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79 --- USMC Rules of Gunfighting #20: The faster you finish the fight, the less shot you will get. --- 896 days since the first successful private support mission to ISS (SpaceX)
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Axb, Thursday, November 13, 2014, 5:45:02 PM, you wrote: sometimes a small hint can save time and frustration... are you nearly there by now? Looks not to bad, even if for reasons stated I can only test from within the LAN- Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: connection from ::1 [::1]:45893 to port 783, fd 6 Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: setuid to spamtest succeeded Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: processing message 12110257802.20141113182...@niamh.org.uk for spamtest:1028 Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: clean message (-2.0/4.5) for spamtest:1028 in 0.2 seconds, 918 bytes. Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: result: . -2 - BAYES_00 scantime=0.2,size=918,user=spamtest,uid=1028,required_score=4.5,rhost=::1,raddr=::1,rport=45893,mid=12110257802.20141113182...@niamh.org.uk,bayes=0.00,autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21625]: prefork: child states: II Though spamassassin doesn't currently appear in the chkconfig --list -- Best regards, Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Re: Missing Modules
Am 13.11.2014 um 19:26 schrieb Niamh Holding: Though spamassassin doesn't currently appear in the chkconfig --list chkconfig --add spamassassin [harry@srv-rhsoft:~]$ chkconfig --help chkconfig Version 1.3.63 - Copyright (C) 1997-2008 Red Hat, Inc. Kostenlose Weitergabe unter den Bedingungen der GNU Public License erlaubt. Aufruf: chkconfig [--list] [--type type] [name] chkconfig --add Name chkconfig --del Name chkconfig --override Name chkconfig [--level levels] [--type type] Name on|off|reset|resetpriorities signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Missing Modules
On 11/13/2014 07:26 PM, Niamh Holding wrote: Hello Axb, Thursday, November 13, 2014, 5:45:02 PM, you wrote: sometimes a small hint can save time and frustration... are you nearly there by now? Looks not to bad, even if for reasons stated I can only test from within the LAN- Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: connection from ::1 [::1]:45893 to port 783, fd 6 Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: setuid to spamtest succeeded Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: processing message 12110257802.20141113182...@niamh.org.uk for spamtest:1028 Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: clean message (-2.0/4.5) for spamtest:1028 in 0.2 seconds, 918 bytes. Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: result: . -2 - BAYES_00 scantime=0.2,size=918,user=spamtest,uid=1028,required_score=4.5,rhost=::1,raddr=::1,rport=45893,mid=12110257802.20141113182...@niamh.org.uk,bayes=0.00,autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21625]: prefork: child states: II Though spamassassin doesn't currently appear in the chkconfig --list what are you using as glue between your MTA and SA? or are you using procmail? (If you once mentioned it, I can't find it)
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 6:33:35 PM, you wrote:
or are you using procmail?
Yep
:0fw spamassassin.lock
* 512000
| /usr/local/bin/spamc -u spamtest
# | /usr/local/bin/spamassassin
# All mail with a score 10 is dumped to /dev/null
:0
* ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*
/dev/null
# All mail tagged as spam (eg. with a score higher than the set threshold)
# is forwarded to s...@fullbore.com
:0
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
! s...@fullbore.co.uk
# Work around procmail bug: any output on stderr will cause the F in From
# to be dropped. This will re-add it.
:0
* ^^rom[ ]
{
LOG=*** Dropped F off From_ header! Fixing up.
:0 fhw
| sed -e '1s/^/F/'
}
--
Best regards,
Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Re: Missing Modules
On 11/13/2014 07:50 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 6:33:35 PM, you wrote:
or are you using procmail?
Yep
:0fw spamassassin.lock
* 512000
| /usr/local/bin/spamc -u spamtest
# | /usr/local/bin/spamassassin
# All mail with a score 10 is dumped to /dev/null
:0
* ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*
/dev/null
# All mail tagged as spam (eg. with a score higher than the set threshold)
# is forwarded to s...@fullbore.com
:0
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
! s...@fullbore.co.uk
# Work around procmail bug: any output on stderr will cause the F in From
# to be dropped. This will re-add it.
:0
* ^^rom[ ]
{
LOG=*** Dropped F off From_ header! Fixing up.
:0 fhw
| sed -e '1s/^/F/'
}
so spamd is running?
Something started it so now you gotta find it to make sure you can
stop/start the service if required.
Re: Missing Modules
Hello Axb, Thursday, November 13, 2014, 6:56:05 PM, you wrote: so spamd is running? Something started it so now you gotta find it to make sure you can stop/start the service if required. Me started it- service spamassassin start :) I had the init scripts in a backup from the main server. And this works as expected service spamassassin restart -- Best regards, Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Re: Missing Modules
Am 13.11.2014 um 20:10 schrieb Niamh Holding: Hello Axb, Thursday, November 13, 2014, 6:56:05 PM, you wrote: so spamd is running? Something started it so now you gotta find it to make sure you can stop/start the service if required. Me started it- service spamassassin start :) I had the init scripts in a backup from the main server. And this works as expected service spamassassin restart yes, that is all fine as said chkconfig --add spamassassin and chkconfig knows about it, in case of a RPM install there are scriptlets registering the service at install and unregister it at uninstall without a a package you need to run that command at your own that's all in that context signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
