You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com> on 2009/07/03 20:29:41 UTC
Re: 3.3.0 plans
On 06/29/2009 11:59 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 16:27, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 06/29/2009 07:44 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>> How's about I cut an alpha at the end of this week?
>>>
>> Why end of the week if nothing on the list is blockers?
>
> ok ok. good point ;)
>
> Let's give it 3 days to garner some comments and possibly close out a
> few of those P1s and P2s. Wednesday evening...
>
> --j.
How is this going?
Warren
Re: 3.3.0 plans, what next?
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:17, Justin Mason<jm...@jmason.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:51, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 07/15/2009 06:41 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Do we have enough variety of users submitting nightly mass check data?
>>>
>>> we still need some more, I think.
>>>
>>> MSECS SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME WHO/AGE
>>> 0.00000 46.7930 0.0431 0.999 0.96 0.01 T_CN_URL
>>> 0.00000 1.3699 0.0000 1.000 0.46 0.01 T_CN_URL bb-jhardin
>>> 0.00000 68.2628 0.0000 1.000 0.99 0.01 T_CN_URL bb-jm
>>> 0.00000 44.9004 0.0132 1.000 0.99 0.01 T_CN_URL dos
>>> 0.00000 19.0590 0.0160 0.999 0.94 0.01 T_CN_URL jm
>>> 0.00000 2.7273 0.0000 1.000 0.75 0.01 T_CN_URL wtogami
>>> 0.00000 5.6111 0.2874 0.951 0.66 0.01 T_CN_URL zmi
>>>
>>
>> What do each of these columns mean?
>
> see http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/MassCheck
uh, actually, http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/HitFrequencies
--
--j.
Re: 3.3.0 plans, what next?
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:51, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/15/2009 06:41 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>>
>>> Do we have enough variety of users submitting nightly mass check data?
>>
>> we still need some more, I think.
>>
>> MSECS SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME WHO/AGE
>> 0.00000 46.7930 0.0431 0.999 0.96 0.01 T_CN_URL
>> 0.00000 1.3699 0.0000 1.000 0.46 0.01 T_CN_URL bb-jhardin
>> 0.00000 68.2628 0.0000 1.000 0.99 0.01 T_CN_URL bb-jm
>> 0.00000 44.9004 0.0132 1.000 0.99 0.01 T_CN_URL dos
>> 0.00000 19.0590 0.0160 0.999 0.94 0.01 T_CN_URL jm
>> 0.00000 2.7273 0.0000 1.000 0.75 0.01 T_CN_URL wtogami
>> 0.00000 5.6111 0.2874 0.951 0.66 0.01 T_CN_URL zmi
>>
>
> What do each of these columns mean?
see http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/MassCheck . But the only bit
that's relevant to this discussion is the "WHO" part -- ie those
contributor accounts at the end of each line.
--j.
Re: 3.3.0 plans, what next?
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 07/15/2009 06:41 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>> Do we have enough variety of users submitting nightly mass check data?
>
> we still need some more, I think.
>
> MSECS SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME WHO/AGE
> 0.00000 46.7930 0.0431 0.999 0.96 0.01 T_CN_URL
> 0.00000 1.3699 0.0000 1.000 0.46 0.01 T_CN_URL bb-jhardin
> 0.00000 68.2628 0.0000 1.000 0.99 0.01 T_CN_URL bb-jm
> 0.00000 44.9004 0.0132 1.000 0.99 0.01 T_CN_URL dos
> 0.00000 19.0590 0.0160 0.999 0.94 0.01 T_CN_URL jm
> 0.00000 2.7273 0.0000 1.000 0.75 0.01 T_CN_URL wtogami
> 0.00000 5.6111 0.2874 0.951 0.66 0.01 T_CN_URL zmi
>
What do each of these columns mean?
Warren
Re: 3.3.0 plans, what next?
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 04:14, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Thanks for kicking this off. My RPM packages with packaged rules seem to be
> working well on RHEL4, RHEL5 and Fedora 10+.
excellent!
> Do we have enough variety of users submitting nightly mass check data?
we still need some more, I think.
MSECS SPAM% HAM% S/O RANK SCORE NAME WHO/AGE
0.00000 46.7930 0.0431 0.999 0.96 0.01 T_CN_URL
0.00000 1.3699 0.0000 1.000 0.46 0.01 T_CN_URL bb-jhardin
0.00000 68.2628 0.0000 1.000 0.99 0.01 T_CN_URL bb-jm
0.00000 44.9004 0.0132 1.000 0.99 0.01 T_CN_URL dos
0.00000 19.0590 0.0160 0.999 0.94 0.01 T_CN_URL jm
0.00000 2.7273 0.0000 1.000 0.75 0.01 T_CN_URL wtogami
0.00000 5.6111 0.2874 0.951 0.66 0.01 T_CN_URL zmi
That's not bad, but it could be better. In numbers, the nonspam is
overwhelmingly coming from my corpus and Daryl's (which has some FPs,
I need to mail those on to you D).
> What remains to be fixed before 3.3.0?
can you see this?
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=runnamed&namedcmd=33bugs
if not, try this:
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&target_milestone=3.3.0&long_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&known_name=33bugs&query_based_on=33bugs&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=
very little needs to be done. Right now I'm thinking just the P1s and P2s:
6143 nor P1 NEW Rule2XSBody segfaults due to rule
containing NUL chars
6144 blo P1 NEW write changes list for 3.3.0 release
6155 blo P1 NEW generate new scores for 3.3.0 release
4949 nor P2 NEW spamd shutting down when unable to fork new processes
6003 nor P2 NEW whitelist_from_rcvd propagates to other users
6132 enh P2 REOP FreeMail plugin
6150 maj P2 REOP spamd fails: /usr/bin/spamd line 2504
> What is a theoretical schedule for 3.3.0?
I haven't come up with real dates, but I think we could have this
released (ie out of beta) in 2 months.
--j.
Re: 3.3.0 plans, what next?
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
Thanks for kicking this off. My RPM packages with packaged rules seem
to be working well on RHEL4, RHEL5 and Fedora 10+.
Do we have enough variety of users submitting nightly mass check data?
What remains to be fixed before 3.3.0?
What is a theoretical schedule for 3.3.0?
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: 3.3.0 plans
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:07, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/07/2009 04:57 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 23:36, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 07/06/2009 06:12 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>>>
>>>> crap, you're right. :(
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6147
>>>>
>>>> there's a patch there that appears to fix it. does it work for you?
>>>>
>>>> --j.
>>>
>>> A patch only for MANIFEST* going to copy *.pre files from the tarball,
>>> when
>>> the tarball lacks those files?
>>>
>>> It seems MANIFEST* only effects what goes from the SCM into tarball.
>>
>> yep, you'd have to rebuild the tarball.
>>
>>> Anyhow, I'm adding the *.pre files manually for the initial package.
>>
>> ok
>
> But now I'm unable to push this packaged due to the tainting issue. Is this
> is in fact a perl bug, not spamassassin's fault? This is the latest version
> of upstream perl.
I haven't looked into it, but iirc, it's a perl bug. (at least a bug
in a module bundled with perl.) We trigger it due to our extensive
use of -T (taint mode). As Mark notes, we may be able to work around
it in our code though.
--j.
Re: 3.3.0 plans
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 07/07/2009 04:57 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 23:36, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 07/06/2009 06:12 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>> crap, you're right. :(
>>> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6147
>>>
>>> there's a patch there that appears to fix it. does it work for you?
>>>
>>> --j.
>> A patch only for MANIFEST* going to copy *.pre files from the tarball, when
>> the tarball lacks those files?
>>
>> It seems MANIFEST* only effects what goes from the SCM into tarball.
>
> yep, you'd have to rebuild the tarball.
>
>> Anyhow, I'm adding the *.pre files manually for the initial package.
>
> ok
But now I'm unable to push this packaged due to the tainting issue. Is
this is in fact a perl bug, not spamassassin's fault? This is the
latest version of upstream perl.
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: 3.3.0 plans
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 23:36, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/06/2009 06:12 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>> crap, you're right. :(
>> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6147
>>
>> there's a patch there that appears to fix it. does it work for you?
>>
>> --j.
>
> A patch only for MANIFEST* going to copy *.pre files from the tarball, when
> the tarball lacks those files?
>
> It seems MANIFEST* only effects what goes from the SCM into tarball.
yep, you'd have to rebuild the tarball.
> Anyhow, I'm adding the *.pre files manually for the initial package.
ok
--j.
Re: 3.3.0 plans
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 07/06/2009 06:12 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
>
> crap, you're right. :(
> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6147
>
> there's a patch there that appears to fix it. does it work for you?
>
> --j.
A patch only for MANIFEST* going to copy *.pre files from the tarball,
when the tarball lacks those files?
It seems MANIFEST* only effects what goes from the SCM into tarball.
Anyhow, I'm adding the *.pre files manually for the initial package.
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: 3.3.0 plans
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 22:40, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/06/2009 05:32 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 21:05, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 07/06/2009 04:00 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Warren,
>>>>
>>>>> On 07/03/2009 10:37 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The public alpha release was announced yesterday on the users mailing
>>>>>> list:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/200907.mbox/%
>>>>>> 3C6c399e450907021522k1678f0ffn454a1e670f064b40@mail.gmail.com%3E
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm having trouble getting it to run on Fedora 11.
>>>>>
>>>>> [root@newcaprica spamassassin]#
>>>>> sa-update config: no configuration text or files found!
>>>>> do you need to run 'sa-update'?
>>>>> check: no loaded plugin implements 'check_main': cannot scan!
>>>>> Check the necessary '.pre' files are in the config directory.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, and? Did you run sa-update???
>>>>
>>>> The 3.3 no longer comes with rules in the same package.
>>>> These must be installed separately with 'sa-update',
>>>> which either fetches them from the net, or can install
>>>> them from a tar - which is in the same directory
>>>> as 3.3.0-alpha1 is.
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>
>>> sa-update is failing due to the lack of the /etc/mail/spamassassin/*.pre
>>> files.
>>>
>>
>> this sounds like our RPM spec file is buggy -- does it work if
>> installed from the tgz?
>>
>> --j.
>
> This isn't the upstream RPM spec file. This is Fedora's spec file.
>
> How can it copy the *.pre files into the RPM if the *.pre files do not exist
> in the tarball's rules/ directory?
crap, you're right. :(
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6147
there's a patch there that appears to fix it. does it work for you?
--j.
Re: 3.3.0 plans
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 07/06/2009 05:32 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 21:05, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 07/06/2009 04:00 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
>>> Warren,
>>>
>>>> On 07/03/2009 10:37 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
>>>>> The public alpha release was announced yesterday on the users mailing
>>>>> list:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/200907.mbox/%
>>>>> 3C6c399e450907021522k1678f0ffn454a1e670f064b40@mail.gmail.com%3E
>>>> I'm having trouble getting it to run on Fedora 11.
>>>>
>>>> [root@newcaprica spamassassin]#
>>>> sa-update config: no configuration text or files found!
>>>> do you need to run 'sa-update'?
>>>> check: no loaded plugin implements 'check_main': cannot scan!
>>>> Check the necessary '.pre' files are in the config directory.
>>> Yes, and? Did you run sa-update???
>>>
>>> The 3.3 no longer comes with rules in the same package.
>>> These must be installed separately with 'sa-update',
>>> which either fetches them from the net, or can install
>>> them from a tar - which is in the same directory
>>> as 3.3.0-alpha1 is.
>>>
>>> Mark
>> sa-update is failing due to the lack of the /etc/mail/spamassassin/*.pre
>> files.
>>
>
> this sounds like our RPM spec file is buggy -- does it work if
> installed from the tgz?
>
> --j.
This isn't the upstream RPM spec file. This is Fedora's spec file.
How can it copy the *.pre files into the RPM if the *.pre files do not
exist in the tarball's rules/ directory?
Warren
Re: 3.3.0 plans
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 21:05, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/06/2009 04:00 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
>>
>> Warren,
>>
>>> On 07/03/2009 10:37 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The public alpha release was announced yesterday on the users mailing
>>>> list:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/200907.mbox/%
>>>> 3C6c399e450907021522k1678f0ffn454a1e670f064b40@mail.gmail.com%3E
>>>
>>> I'm having trouble getting it to run on Fedora 11.
>>>
>>> [root@newcaprica spamassassin]#
>>> sa-update config: no configuration text or files found!
>>> do you need to run 'sa-update'?
>>> check: no loaded plugin implements 'check_main': cannot scan!
>>> Check the necessary '.pre' files are in the config directory.
>>
>> Yes, and? Did you run sa-update???
>>
>> The 3.3 no longer comes with rules in the same package.
>> These must be installed separately with 'sa-update',
>> which either fetches them from the net, or can install
>> them from a tar - which is in the same directory
>> as 3.3.0-alpha1 is.
>>
>> Mark
>
> sa-update is failing due to the lack of the /etc/mail/spamassassin/*.pre
> files.
>
this sounds like our RPM spec file is buggy -- does it work if
installed from the tgz?
--j.
Re: 3.3.0 plans
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 07/06/2009 04:00 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
> Warren,
>
>> On 07/03/2009 10:37 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
>>> The public alpha release was announced yesterday on the users mailing
>>> list:
>>>
>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/200907.mbox/%
>>> 3C6c399e450907021522k1678f0ffn454a1e670f064b40@mail.gmail.com%3E
>> I'm having trouble getting it to run on Fedora 11.
>>
>> [root@newcaprica spamassassin]#
>> sa-update config: no configuration text or files found!
>> do you need to run 'sa-update'?
>> check: no loaded plugin implements 'check_main': cannot scan!
>> Check the necessary '.pre' files are in the config directory.
>
> Yes, and? Did you run sa-update???
>
> The 3.3 no longer comes with rules in the same package.
> These must be installed separately with 'sa-update',
> which either fetches them from the net, or can install
> them from a tar - which is in the same directory
> as 3.3.0-alpha1 is.
>
> Mark
sa-update is failing due to the lack of the /etc/mail/spamassassin/*.pre
files.
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: 3.3.0 plans
Posted by Mark Martinec <Ma...@ijs.si>.
Warren,
> On 07/03/2009 10:37 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
> > The public alpha release was announced yesterday on the users mailing
> > list:
> >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/200907.mbox/%
> >3C6c399e450907021522k1678f0ffn454a1e670f064b40@mail.gmail.com%3E
>
> I'm having trouble getting it to run on Fedora 11.
>
> [root@newcaprica spamassassin]#
> sa-update config: no configuration text or files found!
> do you need to run 'sa-update'?
> check: no loaded plugin implements 'check_main': cannot scan!
> Check the necessary '.pre' files are in the config directory.
Yes, and? Did you run sa-update???
The 3.3 no longer comes with rules in the same package.
These must be installed separately with 'sa-update',
which either fetches them from the net, or can install
them from a tar - which is in the same directory
as 3.3.0-alpha1 is.
Mark
Re: 3.3.0-alpha1 working for anyone?
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
> Checking if your kit is complete...
> Looks good
> 'ENABLE_SSL' is not a known MakeMaker parameter name.
> 'SYSCONFDIR' is not a known MakeMaker parameter name.
> Writing Makefile for Mail::SpamAssassin
> Makefile written by ExtUtils::MakeMaker 6.42
> + /usr/bin/make 'OPTIMIZE=-O2 -g' -j3
>
> spamassassin-3.2.5 does not complain about ENABLE_SSL or SYSCONFDIR in
> MakeMaker. What changed? Do we need to adapt?
no, that should be fine. (we should probably fix it ;)
btw, this should work --
perl Makefile.PL PREFIX=/tmp/sa
make
make install
/tmp/sa/bin/sa-update
does that work for you? even without an /etc/mail/spamassassin or
/usr/share/spamassassin? if so it's definitely the .spec file IMO.
--j.
Re: 3.3.0-alpha1 working for anyone?
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 07/06/2009 03:59 PM, Michael Parker wrote:
>>
>> spamassassin-3.2.5 rules/ contains the *.pre files.
>> spamassassin-3.3.0-alpha1 rules/ is missing *.pre files.
>>
>> Was this intentional?
>
> Yes. 3.3 requires that you run sa-update after installation to pick up
> the latest rules release. I believe this is documented.
>
> For packagers such as yourself, you'll probably want to have a separate
> rules package for that initial install.
>
[root@newcaprica spamassassin]# sa-update
config: no configuration text or files found! do you need to run
'sa-update'?
check: no loaded plugin implements 'check_main': cannot scan!
Check the necessary '.pre' files are in the config directory.
Isn't this a chicken and egg problem then?
Warren
Re: 3.3.0-alpha1 working for anyone?
Posted by Michael Parker <pa...@pobox.com>.
On Jul 6, 2009, at 3:46 PM, Warren Togami wrote:
> On 07/06/2009 03:59 PM, Michael Parker wrote:
>> Yes. 3.3 requires that you run sa-update after installation to pick
>> up
>> the latest rules release. I believe this is documented.
>>
>> For packagers such as yourself, you'll probably want to have a
>> separate
>> rules package for that initial install.
>>
>> Michael
>
> It appears that we were overzealous in removing the the rules from
> the tarball? sa-update does not work all without the *.pre files.
> Furthermore package upgrades expect the *.pre files to be installed
> in the newer version of the package as they need to exist as config
> files. They are gone from the alpha1 tarball.
>
> Shouldn't the *.pre files be re-added to the tarball rules/
> directory, without the accompanying rules? I added them to my
> tarball and after you install the resulting RPM binary package, sa-
> update works.
>
>
Perhaps. Sounds like a bug, can you please file one.
Thanks
Michael
Re: 3.3.0-alpha1 working for anyone?
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 07/06/2009 03:59 PM, Michael Parker wrote:
> Yes. 3.3 requires that you run sa-update after installation to pick up
> the latest rules release. I believe this is documented.
>
> For packagers such as yourself, you'll probably want to have a separate
> rules package for that initial install.
>
> Michael
It appears that we were overzealous in removing the the rules from the
tarball? sa-update does not work all without the *.pre files.
Furthermore package upgrades expect the *.pre files to be installed in
the newer version of the package as they need to exist as config files.
They are gone from the alpha1 tarball.
Shouldn't the *.pre files be re-added to the tarball rules/ directory,
without the accompanying rules? I added them to my tarball and after
you install the resulting RPM binary package, sa-update works.
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: 3.3.0-alpha1 working for anyone?
Posted by Michael Parker <pa...@pobox.com>.
On Jul 6, 2009, at 2:52 PM, Warren Togami wrote:
> On 07/06/2009 03:13 PM, Warren Togami wrote:
>> On 07/03/2009 10:37 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
>>> The public alpha release was announced yesterday on the users
>>> mailing
>>> list:
>>>
>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/200907.mbox/%3C6c399e450907021522k1678f0ffn454a1e670f064b40@mail.gmail.com%3E
>>>
>>
>> I'm having trouble getting it to run on Fedora 11.
>>
>> [root@newcaprica spamassassin]# sa-update
>> config: no configuration text or files found! do you need to run
>> 'sa-update'?
>> check: no loaded plugin implements 'check_main': cannot scan!
>> Check the necessary '.pre' files are in the config directory.
>>
>> *** spamassassin-3.2.5 ***
>>
>> [root@newcaprica ~]# cd /etc/mail/spamassassin/
>> [root@newcaprica spamassassin]# ls
>> init.pre local.cf sa-update-keys spamassassin-default.rc
>> spamassassin-helper.sh spamassassin-spamc.rc v310.pre v312.pre
>> v320.pre
>>
>> *** spamassassin-3.3.0-alpha1 ***
>>
>> [root@newcaprica ~]# cd /etc/mail/spamassassin/
>> [root@newcaprica spamassassin]# ls
>> local.cf sa-update-keys spamassassin-default.rc spamassassin-
>> helper.sh
>> spamassassin-spamc.rc
>>
>> All of the *.pre files are no longer being installed into our RPM. It
>> seems to pass the test suite though.
>>
>
> spamassassin-3.2.5 rules/ contains the *.pre files.
> spamassassin-3.3.0-alpha1 rules/ is missing *.pre files.
>
> Was this intentional?
Yes. 3.3 requires that you run sa-update after installation to pick
up the latest rules release. I believe this is documented.
For packagers such as yourself, you'll probably want to have a
separate rules package for that initial install.
Michael
>
>
> Is 3.3.0-alpha1 working for anybody?
>
> Possibly a separate issue this is the %build section from our
> spamassassin.spec file.
>
> %build
> CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS"; export CFLAGS
> %{__perl} Makefile.PL PREFIX=%{_prefix} SYSCONFDIR=%{_sysconfdir}
> DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT < /dev/null
> %{__make}
>
> Checking if your kit is complete...
> Looks good
> 'ENABLE_SSL' is not a known MakeMaker parameter name.
> 'SYSCONFDIR' is not a known MakeMaker parameter name.
> Writing Makefile for Mail::SpamAssassin
> Makefile written by ExtUtils::MakeMaker 6.42
> + /usr/bin/make 'OPTIMIZE=-O2 -g' -j3
>
> spamassassin-3.2.5 does not complain about ENABLE_SSL or SYSCONFDIR
> in MakeMaker. What changed? Do we need to adapt?
>
> Warren Togami
> wtogami@redhat.com
3.3.0-alpha1 working for anyone?
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 07/06/2009 03:13 PM, Warren Togami wrote:
> On 07/03/2009 10:37 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
>> The public alpha release was announced yesterday on the users mailing
>> list:
>>
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/200907.mbox/%3C6c399e450907021522k1678f0ffn454a1e670f064b40@mail.gmail.com%3E
>>
>
> I'm having trouble getting it to run on Fedora 11.
>
> [root@newcaprica spamassassin]# sa-update
> config: no configuration text or files found! do you need to run
> 'sa-update'?
> check: no loaded plugin implements 'check_main': cannot scan!
> Check the necessary '.pre' files are in the config directory.
>
> *** spamassassin-3.2.5 ***
>
> [root@newcaprica ~]# cd /etc/mail/spamassassin/
> [root@newcaprica spamassassin]# ls
> init.pre local.cf sa-update-keys spamassassin-default.rc
> spamassassin-helper.sh spamassassin-spamc.rc v310.pre v312.pre v320.pre
>
> *** spamassassin-3.3.0-alpha1 ***
>
> [root@newcaprica ~]# cd /etc/mail/spamassassin/
> [root@newcaprica spamassassin]# ls
> local.cf sa-update-keys spamassassin-default.rc spamassassin-helper.sh
> spamassassin-spamc.rc
>
> All of the *.pre files are no longer being installed into our RPM. It
> seems to pass the test suite though.
>
spamassassin-3.2.5 rules/ contains the *.pre files.
spamassassin-3.3.0-alpha1 rules/ is missing *.pre files.
Was this intentional?
Is 3.3.0-alpha1 working for anybody?
Possibly a separate issue this is the %build section from our
spamassassin.spec file.
%build
CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS"; export CFLAGS
%{__perl} Makefile.PL PREFIX=%{_prefix} SYSCONFDIR=%{_sysconfdir}
DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT < /dev/null
%{__make}
Checking if your kit is complete...
Looks good
'ENABLE_SSL' is not a known MakeMaker parameter name.
'SYSCONFDIR' is not a known MakeMaker parameter name.
Writing Makefile for Mail::SpamAssassin
Makefile written by ExtUtils::MakeMaker 6.42
+ /usr/bin/make 'OPTIMIZE=-O2 -g' -j3
spamassassin-3.2.5 does not complain about ENABLE_SSL or SYSCONFDIR in
MakeMaker. What changed? Do we need to adapt?
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: 3.3.0 plans
Posted by Warren Togami <wt...@redhat.com>.
On 07/03/2009 10:37 PM, Matt Kettler wrote:
> The public alpha release was announced yesterday on the users mailing list:
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/200907.mbox/%3C6c399e450907021522k1678f0ffn454a1e670f064b40@mail.gmail.com%3E
I'm having trouble getting it to run on Fedora 11.
[root@newcaprica spamassassin]# sa-update
config: no configuration text or files found! do you need to run
'sa-update'?
check: no loaded plugin implements 'check_main': cannot scan!
Check the necessary '.pre' files are in the config directory.
*** spamassassin-3.2.5 ***
[root@newcaprica ~]# cd /etc/mail/spamassassin/
[root@newcaprica spamassassin]# ls
init.pre local.cf sa-update-keys spamassassin-default.rc
spamassassin-helper.sh spamassassin-spamc.rc v310.pre v312.pre v320.pre
*** spamassassin-3.3.0-alpha1 ***
[root@newcaprica ~]# cd /etc/mail/spamassassin/
[root@newcaprica spamassassin]# ls
local.cf sa-update-keys spamassassin-default.rc
spamassassin-helper.sh spamassassin-spamc.rc
All of the *.pre files are no longer being installed into our RPM. It
seems to pass the test suite though.
All tests successful.
Files=151, Tests=1938, 173 wallclock secs ( 1.05 usr 0.39 sys + 67.07
cusr 13.81 csys = 82.32 CPU)
Result: PASS
Still looking...
Warren Togami
wtogami@redhat.com
Re: 3.3.0 plans
Posted by Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>.
Warren Togami wrote:
> On 06/29/2009 11:59 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 16:27, Warren Togami<wt...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On 06/29/2009 07:44 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
>>>> How's about I cut an alpha at the end of this week?
>>>>
>>> Why end of the week if nothing on the list is blockers?
>>
>> ok ok. good point ;)
>>
>> Let's give it 3 days to garner some comments and possibly close out a
>> few of those P1s and P2s. Wednesday evening...
>>
>> --j.
>
> How is this going?
>
> Warren
>
>
The public alpha release was announced yesterday on the users mailing list:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/spamassassin-users/200907.mbox/%3C6c399e450907021522k1678f0ffn454a1e670f064b40@mail.gmail.com%3E