Re: Spamassassin conflits - help me please! (SOLVED!)

["flaviobrito@click21.com.br" <fl...@click21.com.br>]

To deal with spamassassin conflits in my debian woody.  I produce a very 
little guide.

My steps:

1 - Remove spamassassin debian woody package - apt-get remove spamassassin
2 - Remove old SA rules - /etc/spamassassin - rm /etc/spamassassin/[0-9]*.cf
3 - Install SA using perl scrits and not apt-get
3.1 perl -MCPAN -e shell
3.2 i /Mail::SpamAssassin/
4. Test if you are right using this script - the main goal of these 
scripts is to show what modules you have:


###################################
#!/usr/bin/perl

use ExtUtils::Installed;
my $instmod = ExtUtils::Installed->new();
foreach my $module ($instmod->modules()) {
my $version = $instmod->version($module) || "???";
       print "$module -- $version\n";
}
###################################

Output example:

Mail::SpamAssassin -- 3.000002
Net::DNS -- 0.48
Perl -- 5.6.1
Test::Harness -- 2.46
Test::Simple -- 0.54


Thank you

Flávio




flaviobrito@click21.com.br escreveu:

> Thank you Matt
>
> But after correct my rules, I re-test and I received
>
> spamassassin -t < sample-spam.txt > spam.out
> Net::DNS version is 0.19, but need 0.34dnsavailable-1 at 
> lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Dns.pm line 1230.
> Can't locate object method "handle_auto_report" via package 
> "Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus" (perhaps you forgot to load 
> "Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus"?) at /usr/bin/spamassassin line 231.
>
> All packages came from official woody repository.  But woody 
> spamassassin package contains PerMsgSatatus!
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Matt Kettler escreveu:
>
>> At 09:11 AM 1/25/2005, flaviobrito@click21.com.br wrote:
>>
>>> I installed a debian woody qmail server using qmailrocks how-to but 
>>> my spamassassin is out of work. I'm using apt-get to install it, but 
>>> I receive many erros like that. How can I solve it
>>>
>>> I receive this errors from a spamassassin standard spam test.
>>>
>>> Failed to run LINES_OF_YELLING SpamAssassin test, skipping:
>>> (Can't locate object method "check_for_yelling" via package 
>>> "Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus"
>>> (perhaps you forgot to load "Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus"?) at 
>>> lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm
>>> line 2312.
>>
>>
>>
>> LINES_OF_YELLING is an old rule that no longer exists in SA. It 
>> sounds like you've got an old copy of the SA rules located on your 
>> system....
>>
>> Double-check /etc/mail/spamassassin and /usr/share/spamassassin and 
>> make sure the rulefiles match the version of SA you are installing 
>> via apt-get.
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: Spamassassin conflits - help me please! (SOLVED!)

[Loren Wilton <lw...@earthlink.net>]

> I've been seeing a LOT of reports recently of problems caused by the
> standard rules being in /etc/spamassassin or /etc/mail/spamassassin,
> something that should not happen. I'm wondering if it's old broken distro
> packages, or user error...

It might be worth adding a few lines to the SA startup code that checks for
one or two of the standard rules files in /etc... and output a debugging
complaint.  Maybe this check would only be made if the -D switch was given.

That could maybe help a few people at least realize that they have a
problem.

Possibly there could even be something at the end of the SA install that
would check for this error and output an error message.  That should make it
really obvious to whoever is doing the install that something is in the
wrong place.  If it happens for everyone that installs package X, it might
become fairly obvious that something is wrong with package X or its
instructions.

        Loren

Re: Spamassassin conflits - help me please! (SOLVED!)

[Stuart Johnston <st...@ebby.com>]

Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 11:08 AM 1/27/2005, flaviobrito@click21.com.br wrote:
> 
>> 2 - Remove old SA rules - /etc/spamassassin - rm 
>> /etc/spamassassin/[0-9]*.cf
> 
> 
> Hmm, interesting.. did debian wind up putting those files there, or did 
> that happen locally?
> 
> I've been seeing a LOT of reports recently of problems caused by the 
> standard rules being in /etc/spamassassin or /etc/mail/spamassassin, 
> something that should not happen. I'm wondering if it's old broken 
> distro packages, or user error...

The old Debian package used /etc/spamassassin for the standard rules. 
The new one uses /usr/share/spamassassin.

Stuart Johnston

Re: Spamassassin conflits - help me please! (SOLVED!)

[Matt Kettler <mk...@evi-inc.com>]

At 11:08 AM 1/27/2005, flaviobrito@click21.com.br wrote:
>2 - Remove old SA rules - /etc/spamassassin - rm /etc/spamassassin/[0-9]*.cf

Hmm, interesting.. did debian wind up putting those files there, or did 
that happen locally?

I've been seeing a LOT of reports recently of problems caused by the 
standard rules being in /etc/spamassassin or /etc/mail/spamassassin, 
something that should not happen. I'm wondering if it's old broken distro 
packages, or user error...

user error might be slightly preventable by putting warnings in the file 
comments.

"Don't copy these to your site rules dir in /etc/, they belong where SA's 
installer put them ($PREFIX/share/spamassassin)"

Unfortunately, I suspect broken packages. It's way too common to be simple 
user error. If it is a distro breakage that has since been fixed, we can at 
least create a FAQ about it.