Re: trying to install 3.0.2 via CPAN

2004-12-21 Thread Chris

On Monday 20 December 2004 05:22 pm, Robert Menschel wrote:
 I found a month or so ago, during a system rebuild, that for some
 reason I was getting errors like this for 3.0.1, from a CPAN install,
 but I then did a download of the tar and installed from that, and
 make test came out clean.

 You might try something similar -- use CPAN to make sure your
 dependencies are all in place (especially the SPF prereqs), and then
 install (at least through the make test from a tarball, and see if
 that gets around the problem.

 Bob Menschel

(I have got to learn to hit 'reply all' when replying on this list)

I guess I did everything bassackwards, I did the upgrade to 3.0.2 from CPAN
(via webmin), noticed the SPF test was skipped, then I installed SPF and
the dependencies.  I didn't notice any actual errors though during my
install.

--
Chris
Registered Linux User 283774 http://counter.li.org
7:12pm up 22 days, 4:31, 1 user, load average: 0.74, 0.64, 0.34

Is that a 286 or are you just running Windows?

Live - From Virgin Radio UK Genesis - Follow You Follow Me

---

-- 
Chris
Registered Linux User 283774 http://counter.li.org
7:18pm up 22 days, 4:36, 1 user, load average: 0.65, 0.60, 0.39

No man is useless who has a friend, and if we are loved we are 
indispensable.
-- Robert Louis Stevenson

Live - From Virgin Radio UK The Stranglers - Duchess



Re: trying to install 3.0.2 via CPAN

2004-12-20 Thread Robert Menschel
Hello alan,

Saturday, December 18, 2004, 7:15:46 PM, you wrote:

ap for some reason i'm getting SPF failures during the 'make test'
ap phase: ...

I found a month or so ago, during a system rebuild, that for some
reason I was getting errors like this for 3.0.1, from a CPAN install,
but I then did a download of the tar and installed from that, and
make test came out clean.

You might try something similar -- use CPAN to make sure your
dependencies are all in place (especially the SPF prereqs), and then
install (at least through the make test from a tarball, and see if
that gets around the problem.

Bob Menschel




trying to install 3.0.2 via CPAN

2004-12-19 Thread alan premselaar
for some reason i'm getting SPF failures during the 'make test' phase:
t/spf...Not found: helo_pass =  SPF_HELO_PASS
# Failed test 1 in t/SATest.pm at line 530
Not found: pass =  SPF_PASS
# Failed test 2 in t/SATest.pm at line 530 fail #2
t/spf...FAILED tests 1-2 

Failed 2/2 tests, 0.00% okay
t/sql_based_whitelist...ok
SpamAssassin 3.0.1 is currently running on the systems (it's happening 
on 2 RedHat systems, one 7.2 and one 9.0).

Mail::SPF::Query is installed and the latest version.
the 7.2 system is running perl 5.6.1 and the 9.0 system is running perl 
5.8.0

I didn't find any information on bugzilla regarding this.
any ideas?
thanks,
alan


Re: trying to install 3.0.2 via CPAN

2004-12-19 Thread Loren Wilton
 for some reason i'm getting SPF failures during the 'make test' phase:

 t/spf...Not found: helo_pass =  SPF_HELO_PASS
 # Failed test 1 in t/SATest.pm at line 530
  Not found: pass =  SPF_PASS
 # Failed test 2 in t/SATest.pm at line 530 fail #2
 t/spf...FAILED tests 1-2

  Failed 2/2 tests, 0.00% okay
 t/sql_based_whitelist...ok

 I didn't find any information on bugzilla regarding this.

There were some comments on the dev list just last night or earlier today
about this problem, or one very much like it.  I didn't quite follow where
the comments led, since I'm not very interested in SPF myself.  But I think
this is something the devs have seen.

Loren



Re: trying to install 3.0.2 via CPAN

2004-12-19 Thread alan premselaar
Loren Wilton wrote:
for some reason i'm getting SPF failures during the 'make test' phase:
t/spf...Not found: helo_pass =  SPF_HELO_PASS
# Failed test 1 in t/SATest.pm at line 530
Not found: pass =  SPF_PASS
# Failed test 2 in t/SATest.pm at line 530 fail #2
t/spf...FAILED tests 1-2
Failed 2/2 tests, 0.00% okay
t/sql_based_whitelist...ok
I didn't find any information on bugzilla regarding this.

There were some comments on the dev list just last night or earlier today
about this problem, or one very much like it.  I didn't quite follow where
the comments led, since I'm not very interested in SPF myself.  But I think
this is something the devs have seen.
Loren
Loren,
 thanks for the response.  So, it's probably best if i just wait to 
upgrade to 3.0.2 until something about this is resolved?  I didn't see 
anything on bugzilla about it.

obviously I could force install, but i really prefer not doing that if I 
can avoid it.

alan


Re: trying to install 3.0.2 via CPAN

2004-12-19 Thread jdow
From: alan premselaar [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Loren Wilton wrote:
 for some reason i'm getting SPF failures during the 'make test' phase:
 
 t/spf...Not found: helo_pass =  SPF_HELO_PASS
 # Failed test 1 in t/SATest.pm at line 530
  Not found: pass =  SPF_PASS
 # Failed test 2 in t/SATest.pm at line 530 fail #2
 t/spf...FAILED tests 1-2
 
  Failed 2/2 tests, 0.00% okay
 t/sql_based_whitelist...ok
 
 I didn't find any information on bugzilla regarding this.
 
 
  There were some comments on the dev list just last night or earlier
today
  about this problem, or one very much like it.  I didn't quite follow
where
  the comments led, since I'm not very interested in SPF myself.  But I
think
  this is something the devs have seen.
 
  Loren
 
 Loren,

   thanks for the response.  So, it's probably best if i just wait to
 upgrade to 3.0.2 until something about this is resolved?  I didn't see
 anything on bugzilla about it.

 obviously I could force install, but i really prefer not doing that if I
 can avoid it.

One of the optional tests failed here with both 3.0.1 and 3.0.2 due to a
missing include file when it tried to run cc to compile some test. I think
it was the either a DB or DNS test. I simply reran with the test disabled.
I should have noted it and run the bug through the dev list. It's a Mandrake
10.1 install with the cooker 3.0.1 Spamassassin against which I tried
running CPAN

{^_^}




Re: trying to install 3.0.2 via CPAN

2004-12-19 Thread Loren Wilton
I think my impression of the note I saw was that this was considered
annoying and that someone ought to look at it.  (That impression may be
wrong, as I said, I really wasn't paying a lot of attention.)

So this almost certainly is still a problem in 3.02, since that was just
released in the last couple of days.
I would expect it will probably be fixed in the .03/.04 timeframe, just at a
guess.

Loren