Re: SA-UPDATE and recent branches/3.1 rules? or Did I miss an SA version update?
On Mon, Jan 01, 2007 at 12:46:19PM -0500, Andy Figueroa wrote: > Concur. I noted the errors when I ran sa-update -D a little while ago. > But, best I can tell, nothing changed. Even the temporary files > in /tmp were deleted. I also checked /etc/mail/spamassassin and only > the date got changed on the sa-update-keys directory, but nothing new > in the directory. spamassassin --lint passes. So, why am I afraid to > restart spamd? The man page and wiki explain it, but if the channel lint check fails, the currently installed config files aren't updated. So you can restart spamd if you want to, but the configs weren't changed. -- Randomly Selected Tagline: It's lucky you're going so slowly, because you're going in the wrong direction. pgpafMigbnLio.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: SA-UPDATE and recent branches/3.1 rules? or Did I miss an SA version update?
Concur. I noted the errors when I ran sa-update -D a little while ago. But, best I can tell, nothing changed. Even the temporary files in /tmp were deleted. I also checked /etc/mail/spamassassin and only the date got changed on the sa-update-keys directory, but nothing new in the directory. spamassassin --lint passes. So, why am I afraid to restart spamd? -- Andy Figueroa On Monday 01 January 2007 11:37, R Lists06 wrote: > What I know that is different is, if you go to > > /var/lib/spamassassin/3.001007/ > > Or wherever your updates go on your machine and check the directory > listings with ls -axl mine show up as the last time I updated and > have not been updated as of today. > > These results tell me we are all ok and should breathe a sigh of > relief.
RE: SA-UPDATE and recent branches/3.1 rules? or Did I miss an SA version update?
> > No, your SA won't be broken. IIRC SA won't apply anything if there's a > failure. At least my SA is still running fine here after my attempted > update this morning. I didn't restart after the failure so in theory > at least SA should still be running off the old set even if the new > set did cause a problem. That said, I'm pretty sure that unless SA > gets an OK return from sa-update nothing is applied. > > If anyone knows different please yell. > > Kind regards > > Nigel What I know that is different is, if you go to /var/lib/spamassassin/3.001007/ Or wherever your updates go on your machine and check the directory listings with ls -axl mine show up as the last time I updated and have not been updated as of today. These results tell me we are all ok and should breathe a sigh of relief. Nothing to see here. :-) - rh -- Robert - Abba Communications Computer & Internet Services (509) 624-7159 - www.abbacomm.net
Re: SA-UPDATE and recent branches/3.1 rules? or Did I miss an SA version update?
On Mon, 1 Jan 2007 11:25:53 -0500, "Shaun T. Erickson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Regardless of the reason, is my SA now broken, and in any case, how do >I recover from this? No, your SA won't be broken. IIRC SA won't apply anything if there's a failure. At least my SA is still running fine here after my attempted update this morning. I didn't restart after the failure so in theory at least SA should still be running off the old set even if the new set did cause a problem. That said, I'm pretty sure that unless SA gets an OK return from sa-update nothing is applied. If anyone knows different please yell. Kind regards Nigel
Re: SA-UPDATE and recent branches/3.1 rules? or Did I miss an SA version update?
Regardless of the reason, is my SA now broken, and in any case, how do I recover from this? -- -ste
Re: SA-UPDATE and recent branches/3.1 rules? or Did I miss an SA version update?
On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 09:46:01 +, Nigel Frankcom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Mon, 1 Jan 2007 01:23:59 -0500, Theo Van Dinter ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>On Sun, Dec 31, 2006 at 09:11:08PM -0600, Larry Rosenman wrote: >>> Is there some process that needs to be automated to ship out the 3.1 >>> branch rules changes via sa-update? >> >>At the moment, we push out the updates manually. It could be automated (I >>already have a script that does 95% of it, which I currently run manually,) >>but I think 3.1 will probably stay manual for a while. >> >>3.2 has automatic updates, which some of us (ok, at least me,) is still not >>too sure about. >> >>> I know I've seen commits to branches/3.1, but no sa-update since 12/19 >> >>Actually, I pushed an update yesterday evening. :P >> >>Generally, updates get put in, and then whenever someone feels like pushing >>it, they can. I usually put in small commits for specific sets of rules, and >>could do multiple edits before I want an update to occur. > >Is anyone else having problems updating with sa-update? Mine's exiting >with code 4 - Full details below > >Kind Regards & a Happy New Year to all. > >Nigel > > >>[15939] dbg: diag: updates complete, exiting with code 4 No, you didn't miss a version update. That was the 1st thing I checked when I saw the 3.002 references. I think Theo may have got his dev tree's mixed up, or maybe a little too much Xmas spirit ;-D Nigel
