You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Richard Hobbs <ri...@crl.toshiba.co.uk> on 2007/03/01 11:52:03 UTC

Re: sa-update doesn't exist on my system

Hello,

Replies inline...

Gary V wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> > If some work and some don't I suspect this could possibly
>> > be a timeout issue.
>>
>> It is a timeout... see my message at 09:30 GMT this morning...
>>
>> ============================================================
>> 421 SMTP incoming data timeout - message abandoned
>> ============================================================
> 
> While it's not clear to me what process produced this message, I would
> assume it's EXIM's reply to the sender.

That is correct. That is the response the sender received from exim.

>> As for crashing out due to a possible time limit, how could i check
>> this? surely such a feature would be built into spamassassin, right?
>>
> 
> I'm guessing here (because I have never used EXIM) but does EXIM set a
> default time limit on sa_router: or sa_spamcheck: ?

Not sure... i'll find out from the exim mailing list.

>> AFAIK, this is a standard debian sarge box, with exim installed and
>> configured, and not much else done to it. I could be wrong, but this is
>> most likely the case.
>>
>> Also, with regards to --local, what does this do, and how can i actually
>> run it this way?
>>
>> Thanks again,
>> Richard.
>>
>>
> 
> It disables network tests. I believe you can edit
> /etc/default/spamassassin and add it to the list of OPTIONS, e.g.:
> 
> OPTIONS="--local --create-prefs --max-children 5 --helper-home-dir"
> 
> then restart spamd
> /etc/init.d/spamassassin restart

You said in your other email that "since the --local option disables net
tests, SA may pass a lot more spam". Does this mean it will think a lot
of legit email is spam, whereas before it knew it was legit?

Thanks again,
Richard.


> Why do you say sa-update is not working? SA-update will not pull new
> files if the files that exist are up to date. You can see if the new
> rules are being used or not if you run a quick spamassassin debug (note
> that --lint turns off net tests so this is not a full debug session):
> 
> spamassassin --lint -D
> 
> you should see stuff like:
> 
> [27662] dbg: plugin: fixed relative path:
> /var/lib/spamassassin/3.001007/updates_spamassassin_org/20_body_tests.cf
> [27662] dbg: config: using
> "/var/lib/spamassassin/3.001007/updates_spamassassin_org/20_body_tests.cf"
> for included file
> [27662] dbg: config: read file
> /var/lib/spamassassin/3.001007/updates_spamassassin_org/20_body_tests.cf
> 
> Gary V
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - Refinance $150,000 loan for $579 a
> month. Intro*Terms 
> https://www2.nextag.com/goto.jsp?product=100000035&url=%2fst.jsp&tm=y&search=mortgage_text_links_88_h27f6&disc=y&vers=743&s=4056&p=5117
> 
> 
> 
> _____________________________________________________________________
> This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by Verizon Business Internet
> Managed Scanning Services - powered by MessageLabs. For further
> information visit http://www.mci.com
> 
> 

-- 
Richard Hobbs (Systems Administrator)
Toshiba Research Europe Ltd. - Speech Technology Group
Email: richard.hobbs@crl.toshiba.co.uk
Web: http://www.toshiba-europe.com/research/
Tel: +44 1223 376964        Mobile: +44 7811 803377

Re: sa-update doesn't exist on my system

Posted by Gary V <mr...@hotmail.com>.
>Hello,
>
>Quick question... This is a snippet from the exim mailing list:
>
> > The routers and transports seem fine. However, a quick check
> > through a FreeBSD Spamassassin change log does reveal that a
> > bug was introduced that gave problems with Exim, Spamassassin
> > and BSMTP:
> >
> > http://pkgsrc.se/mail/spamassassin
> > (bug 4966 in their numbering scheme)
> >
> > I'd check with the Debian package maintainers that this bug
> > has been fixed in the release they've put out.
>
>So... do you think i'm suffering this bug? The URL above indicates that
>it was fixed in 3.1.4, but am i suffering what looks like that bug, do
>you think?
>
>I'm still waiting to hear about the possible timeout setting in the exim
>config.
>
>Trouble is, with testing, if it goes wrong again, email is returned to
>the sender, and for people like my manager etc... this is unacceptable.
>
>Unfortunately, we do not have a test environment at the moment, so if i
>do make a change, i need to be as certain as i can be that it will fix
>the problem :-(
>
>Thanks again people...
>Richard.
>

Not being familiar with Exim4 I'm not sure what to suggest. The Debian 
version of SA should have that patch applied. I saw no recent Exim related 
bug reports on the Debian spamassassin page (but you may have discovered a 
new bug). Just curious, what CPU/hardware are you running and how many 
messages per day? I will mention that it is possible to downgrade back to 
the stable (3.0.x) version of spamassassin provided you have not installed 
programs (like FuzzyOcr) that depend on a 3.1.x version. Even if you did 
install something like FuzzyOcr you could simply remove it. I doubt you have 
made any incompatible changes to local.cf so there should be no reason you 
couldn't keep your current files (/etc/default/spamassassin and 
/etc/spamassassin/local.cf).
# apt-get install spamassassin/stable
# apt-get install spamc/stable
but only as a last resort. This worked for me on a test system - YMMV.
Yeah, a test box would come in handy here. Is anyone else out there using 
this setup successfully?

Gary V

_________________________________________________________________
Find what you need at prices you’ll love. Compare products and save at MSNŽ 
Shopping. 
http://shopping.msn.com/default/shp/?ptnrid=37,ptnrdata=24102&tcode=T001MSN20A0701

Re: sa-update doesn't exist on my system

Posted by Richard Hobbs <ri...@crl.toshiba.co.uk>.
Hello,

Quick question... This is a snippet from the exim mailing list:

> The routers and transports seem fine. However, a quick check
> through a FreeBSD Spamassassin change log does reveal that a
> bug was introduced that gave problems with Exim, Spamassassin
> and BSMTP:
>
> http://pkgsrc.se/mail/spamassassin
> (bug 4966 in their numbering scheme)
>
> I'd check with the Debian package maintainers that this bug
> has been fixed in the release they've put out.

So... do you think i'm suffering this bug? The URL above indicates that
it was fixed in 3.1.4, but am i suffering what looks like that bug, do
you think?

I'm still waiting to hear about the possible timeout setting in the exim
config.

Trouble is, with testing, if it goes wrong again, email is returned to
the sender, and for people like my manager etc... this is unacceptable.

Unfortunately, we do not have a test environment at the moment, so if i
do make a change, i need to be as certain as i can be that it will fix
the problem :-(

Thanks again people...
Richard.


Adam Wilbraham wrote:
>> You said in your other email that "since the --local option disables
>> net tests, SA may pass a lot more spam". Does this mean it will think
>> a lot of legit email is spam, whereas before it knew it was legit?
> 
> Nope, he means the opposite - that a lot more spam will get through as
> clean, as the network tests which help identify spam won't be used.
> 
> 
> Adam.
> 
> _____________________________________________________________________
> This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by Verizon Business Internet Managed Scanning Services - powered by MessageLabs. For further information visit http://www.mci.com
> 
> 

-- 
Richard Hobbs (Systems Administrator)
Toshiba Research Europe Ltd. - Speech Technology Group
Email: richard.hobbs@crl.toshiba.co.uk
Web: http://www.toshiba-europe.com/research/
Tel: +44 1223 376964        Mobile: +44 7811 803377

Re: sa-update doesn't exist on my system

Posted by Adam Wilbraham <ad...@technophobia.com>.
> You said in your other email that "since the --local option disables
> net tests, SA may pass a lot more spam". Does this mean it will think
> a lot of legit email is spam, whereas before it knew it was legit?

Nope, he means the opposite - that a lot more spam will get through as
clean, as the network tests which help identify spam won't be used.


Adam.