On 2/26/2016 9:53 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 26.02.2016 um 15:44 schrieb Bowie Bailey:
On 2/26/2016 9:11 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 26.02.2016 um 15:06 schrieb Bowie Bailey:
Restored a backup yesterday to get the 72_active.cf file back. Rule
updates from the saupdate run at about midnight updated everything
and I
don't see any 0-length files this time
interesting - i had no zero-bytes-file yesterday
in fact rule update tonight failed on every machine, see my other
response to this topic and the question what changed that it failed
for the first time on Fedora 22 as well as Fedora 23 machines
Feb 26 01:41:53 mail-gw sa-update.cron: 26-Feb-2016 01:41:53:
SpamAssassin: Update available, but download or extract failed
Feb 26 01:41:53 mail-gw systemd: sa-update.service: main process
exited, code=exited, status=4/NOPERMISSION
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 250K 2016-02-25 00:38
/var/lib/spamassassin/3.004001/updates_spamassassin_org/72_active.cf
I'm running SA 3.4.1 on CentOS 6.
I had a 0-byte 72_active.cf file yesterday from update 1732039. Last
night, it updated to 1732263 with no problems whatsoever. I have no
idea why it would fail for you unless you did something that would
affect the permissions of those directories. I am assuming
"4/NOPERMISSION" refers to file permissions, but I don't know for sure.
Did you get update 1732039 yesterday?
the failed machines have # UPDATE version 1731806 so i am not sure if
and when i had 1732039, i only remebered that thread after
server-alters of the failing update-service
i fired "sa-update.service" manually to make the same as the automatic
thing including the random sleep of the fedora-script to not overload
SA servers (normallery triggered by sa-update.timer) and this time it
suceeded
now that machine is on
# UPDATE version 1732263
log obviously only contain on-interrupted runs
23-Feb-2016 00:48:06: SpamAssassin: Update processed successfully
24-Feb-2016 00:32:42: SpamAssassin: Update processed successfully
25-Feb-2016 00:38:15: SpamAssassin: Update processed successfully
26-Feb-2016 15:33:57: SpamAssassin: Update processed successfully
If you had failures after 1731806 and then updated to 1732263, you may
have skipped the update with the 0-byte file.
I was curious, because if you got the 1732039 update with a good
72_active.cf file, then it might point to a problem with the download
mirrors rather than the rule generation process.
--
Bowie
