You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by "Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET" <ml...@t-b-o-h.net> on 2008/03/06 22:25:43 UTC

spamc/spamd .. diff versions, diff systems

Hi,

	We are in the middle of a migration of users from a
system which we can't upgrade running 3.1.8, to a new system
(which can of course be upgraded) running 3.2.4 . 

	I'm contemplating having the .procmailrc of users
on the old system call spamc with the hostname of the system
running 3.2.4 (After I start the daemon listening on its IP
instead of 127.0.0.1 only). 

	Would there be any issues doing this? Is there a way
I can libwrap the port instead of firewalling it? 

		Thanks, Tuc

Re: [spamassassin] Re: spamc/spamd .. diff versions, diff systems

Posted by "Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET" <ml...@t-b-o-h.net>.
> > 	Is that to the "Any issues" or "Libwrap"? :) I'm guessing
> > just to the libwrap.
> 
> Both.
>
	Thanks.
> 
> > 	Will probably try it over the weekend and see what happens.
> > 
> > 	Which system will it update the .spamassassin directory on?
> > The "spamc" client, or "spamd" server? I just need to know if I have to
> > make sure not to clobber it when I do my final copy of the users files to
> > the "server".
> 
> It's not currently possible to pass user config to spamd (at least not
> without modifying it), so everything is server centric.  Config will be
> read from the .spamassassin directory in home directories on the server.
> 
	Gotcha. Ok. Thanks. I used the same id/uid/group/gid on the new/old
so I don't think it'll be an issue. 

	You'll know if I run into any issues. :)

		Thanks, Tuc

Re: spamc/spamd .. diff versions, diff systems

Posted by "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <sp...@dostech.ca>.
On 07/03/2008 4:09 PM, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
>>> 	We are in the middle of a migration of users from a
>>> system which we can't upgrade running 3.1.8, to a new system
>>> (which can of course be upgraded) running 3.2.4 . 
>>>
>>> 	I'm contemplating having the .procmailrc of users
>>> on the old system call spamc with the hostname of the system
>>> running 3.2.4 (After I start the daemon listening on its IP
>>> instead of 127.0.0.1 only).
>> That'll work.
>>
>>> 	Would there be any issues doing this? Is there a way
>>> I can libwrap the port instead of firewalling it?
>> Not that I'm aware of.
>>
> 	Is that to the "Any issues" or "Libwrap"? :) I'm guessing
> just to the libwrap.

Both.

> 	Will probably try it over the weekend and see what happens.
> 
> 	Which system will it update the .spamassassin directory on?
> The "spamc" client, or "spamd" server? I just need to know if I have to
> make sure not to clobber it when I do my final copy of the users files to
> the "server".

It's not currently possible to pass user config to spamd (at least not
without modifying it), so everything is server centric.  Config will be
read from the .spamassassin directory in home directories on the server.

Daryl

Re: spamc/spamd .. diff versions, diff systems

Posted by "Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET" <ml...@t-b-o-h.net>.
> > 	We are in the middle of a migration of users from a
> > system which we can't upgrade running 3.1.8, to a new system
> > (which can of course be upgraded) running 3.2.4 . 
> > 
> > 	I'm contemplating having the .procmailrc of users
> > on the old system call spamc with the hostname of the system
> > running 3.2.4 (After I start the daemon listening on its IP
> > instead of 127.0.0.1 only).
> 
> That'll work.
> 
> > 	Would there be any issues doing this? Is there a way
> > I can libwrap the port instead of firewalling it?
> 
> Not that I'm aware of.
> 
	Is that to the "Any issues" or "Libwrap"? :) I'm guessing
just to the libwrap.

	Will probably try it over the weekend and see what happens.

	Which system will it update the .spamassassin directory on?
The "spamc" client, or "spamd" server? I just need to know if I have to
make sure not to clobber it when I do my final copy of the users files to
the "server".

		Thanks, Tuc

Re: spamc/spamd .. diff versions, diff systems

Posted by "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <sp...@dostech.ca>.
On 06/03/2008 4:25 PM, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 	We are in the middle of a migration of users from a
> system which we can't upgrade running 3.1.8, to a new system
> (which can of course be upgraded) running 3.2.4 . 
> 
> 	I'm contemplating having the .procmailrc of users
> on the old system call spamc with the hostname of the system
> running 3.2.4 (After I start the daemon listening on its IP
> instead of 127.0.0.1 only).

That'll work.

> 	Would there be any issues doing this? Is there a way
> I can libwrap the port instead of firewalling it?

Not that I'm aware of.

Daryl