Bryan Hoover wrote:
BH> Craig R Hughes wrote:
BH> > spamd is the thing which is detaching itself from the terminal and
BH> > therefore losing SA debug messages;
BH>
BH> But these messages are dropped when SA is run from .procmailrc aren't
BH> they? That is, aren't SA's "warning" messsage only going to the
BH> terminal anyway, in which case, they would make sense only when SA is
BH> run interactively.
No, they're not dropped -- procmail can log them if you tell it to. I forget
how to tell procmail to log stuff its children print out, but there is a way --
check the procmail manpages.
BH> So it sounds like (well, like one of those "esoteric" design questions,
BH> I happen to enjoy), if SA does not normally write to a disk file log,
BH> there's no reason it should in the case of running as a spamd client -
BH> but if one wants these messages, can't STDERR be redirected (via perhaps
BH> a command line switch or to the hook you mentioned) to a disk file
BH> (seems like some one mentioned this, but I can't find the message now)?
No, you can't just redirect STDERR, if you're using the -d flag, spamd will
detach from the launching tty, and disconnect from that tty's STDERR, STDIN and
STDOUT. If you specify -D and -d together, then spamd should definitely install
a $SIG{__WARN__} handler which redirects to its logmsg() function. Actually, it
should do this if you use -d whether or not you use -D.
C
_______________________________________________________________
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
