You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Johann Spies <js...@sun.ac.za> on 2005/05/10 12:39:28 UTC

The owner of the spamd-process

If you look at the following output of "top" you will see that some
spamd processes runs under the ownership of "spamd" and others under
"root".  I would like to know why?

16930 root       9   0 37908  37M 16548 S    18.7  0.9   0:10 spamd
16927 root      11   0 83720  81M 16296 S    10.7  2.1   0:28 spamd
16929 spamd     10   0 74332  72M 16404 S     6.7  1.9   0:22 spamd
16931 spamd      9   0 38288  37M 16540 S     4.9  0.9   0:07 spamd
16928 spamd      9   0 42340  41M 16364 S     3.5  1.0   0:13 spamd


I have in /etc/init.d/spamassassin:

NAME=spamd
SNAME=spamassassin
DESC="SpamAssassin Mail Filter Daemon"
PIDFILE="/var/run/$NAME.pid"
PNAME="spamd"


Regards
Johann
-- 
Johann Spies          Telefoon: 021-808 4036
Informasietegnologie, Universiteit van Stellenbosch

     "My son, do not despise the LORD's discipline and do
      not resent his rebuke, because the LORD disciplines
      those he loves, as a father the son he delights in."
                                       Proverbs 3:11,12 

Re: The owner of the spamd-process

Posted by Mike Jackson <mj...@barking-dog.net>.
> If you look at the following output of "top" you will see that some
> spamd processes runs under the ownership of "spamd" and others under
> "root".  I would like to know why?
>
> 16930 root       9   0 37908  37M 16548 S    18.7  0.9   0:10 spamd
> 16927 root      11   0 83720  81M 16296 S    10.7  2.1   0:28 spamd
> 16929 spamd     10   0 74332  72M 16404 S     6.7  1.9   0:22 spamd
> 16931 spamd      9   0 38288  37M 16540 S     4.9  0.9   0:07 spamd
> 16928 spamd      9   0 42340  41M 16364 S     3.5  1.0   0:13 spamd
>
>
> I have in /etc/init.d/spamassassin:
>
> NAME=spamd
> SNAME=spamassassin
> DESC="SpamAssassin Mail Filter Daemon"
> PIDFILE="/var/run/$NAME.pid"
> PNAME="spamd"

There was a thread on the mailing list about that a couple weeks ago, but it 
was in relation to *BSD, not Linux. On my FreeBSD systems, the patch that 
was supplied for 3.0.2 fixed it, and it was fixed natively for 3.0.3.