Re: spamassassin --lint ....how long does it take?

[Theo Van Dinter <fe...@apache.org>]

On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 02:27:32PM -0400, Dr Robert Young wrote:
> I downloaded many of the SARE rulesets (not  bigevil however), and I am 
> running  "spamassassin -D --lint". It seems like it is taking a very 
> long time to run. Is this typical or am I "hosed"?  I am running it on 
> a test system (non-production) so it is not currently a serious 
> problem, but I want to be sure of what's up before I try anything on 
> production (probably in a few days).

I think you're not passing it a message so it's waiting on STDIN.
Try "spamassassin -D --lint < /dev/null".

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"Veni, Vidi, Visa" - I came, I saw, I bought

Re: spamassassin --lint ....how long does it take?

[jdow <jd...@earthlink.net>]

From: "Jim Maul" <jm...@elih.org>

> Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 11:43:10AM -0700, Justin Mason wrote:
> > 
> >>eh, Theo, --lint doesn't require a message, it uses one of its own!
> > 
> > 
> > Oh.  Hahaha.  I forgot about that. ;)
> > Never mind me, brain is scattered right now due to work.
> > 
> > My second suggestion is to do local-only in case there's a network
> > check hanging.  Try "spamassassin -LD --lint".
> > 
> 
> Then why does the manpage state to pass it a message?
> 
>         spamassassin [options] < mailmessage > output
>         spamassassin -d < mailmessage > <output>
>         spamassassin -r [-w addr] < mailmessage
>         spamassassin -k [-w addr] < mailmessage
>         spamassassin -W|-R < mailmessage
> 
> All examples show "< mailmessage" after [options].  --lint doesnt say 
> anything about not needing a message passed to it.
> 

-Jim, "spamassassin --lint" is sufficient unto itself. The other examples
up there require input to process. The lint command simply checks that
all the rules are formatted correctly without actually running them.
{^_^}

Re: spamassassin --lint ....how long does it take?

[Jim Maul <jm...@elih.org>]

Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 11:43:10AM -0700, Justin Mason wrote:
> 
>>eh, Theo, --lint doesn't require a message, it uses one of its own!
> 
> 
> Oh.  Hahaha.  I forgot about that. ;)
> Never mind me, brain is scattered right now due to work.
> 
> My second suggestion is to do local-only in case there's a network
> check hanging.  Try "spamassassin -LD --lint".
> 

Then why does the manpage state to pass it a message?

        spamassassin [options] < mailmessage > output
        spamassassin -d < mailmessage > <output>
        spamassassin -r [-w addr] < mailmessage
        spamassassin -k [-w addr] < mailmessage
        spamassassin -W|-R < mailmessage

All examples show "< mailmessage" after [options].  --lint doesnt say 
anything about not needing a message passed to it.

-Jim

Re: spamassassin --lint ....how long does it take?

[Theo Van Dinter <fe...@apache.org>]

On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 11:43:10AM -0700, Justin Mason wrote:
> eh, Theo, --lint doesn't require a message, it uses one of its own!

Oh.  Hahaha.  I forgot about that. ;)
Never mind me, brain is scattered right now due to work.

My second suggestion is to do local-only in case there's a network
check hanging.  Try "spamassassin -LD --lint".

-- 
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"A committee is a life form with 6 or more legs and no brain."
                      - Robert Heinlein

Re: spamassassin --lint ....how long does it take?

[jdow <jd...@earthlink.net>]

From: "Theo Van Dinter" <fe...@apache.org>

> I think you're not passing it a message so it's waiting on STDIN.
> Try "spamassassin -D --lint < /dev/null".

Er, Theo, --lint does not take any parameters.

{o.o}