You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by bu...@spamassassin.apache.org on 2021/10/01 17:54:34 UTC
[Bug 7932] New: SQLite Bayes backend fails due to missing RPAD
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7932
Bug ID: 7932
Summary: SQLite Bayes backend fails due to missing RPAD
Product: Spamassassin
Version: 3.4.2
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Libraries
Assignee: dev@spamassassin.apache.org
Reporter: asabzafjmi@mattcorallo.com
Target Milestone: Undefined
Created attachment 5754
--> https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/attachment.cgi?id=5754&action=edit
Patch for the issue
SQLite does not support the RPAD function, causing most DB queries when using
it as the bayes backend to fail. Instead, we do it manually with sprintf in the
attached patch.
Note that I do now know very much perl, so this is probably not the ideal way
to do it, but this does seem to work quite well in my own testing.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7932] SQLite Bayes backend fails due to missing RPAD
Posted by bu...@spamassassin.apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7932
Matt Corallo <as...@mattcorallo.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |asabzafjmi@mattcorallo.com
--- Comment #1 from Matt Corallo <as...@mattcorallo.com> ---
Any update on this? Do I need to sign the CLA (and how do I do so?)?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7932] SQLite Bayes backend fails due to missing RPAD
Posted by bu...@spamassassin.apache.org.
https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7932
Henrik Krohns <ap...@hege.li> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |apache@hege.li
OS|Linux |All
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|Undefined |4.0.0
--- Comment #2 from Henrik Krohns <ap...@hege.li> ---
These were fixed in
Revision 1899734
Revision 1899738
(Didn't notice this bug.. maybe sprintf would be neater solution, dunno)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.