You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Stefan Jakobs <st...@rus.uni-stuttgart.de> on 2007/07/06 16:26:11 UTC

dccifd and spamassassin

Hello list,

I'm using Spamassassin 3.1.8 with amavisd-new 2.3.3 and postfix 2.4.3 on a 
mailrelay. Some days ago I installed a new version of DCC. And saw in the 
installation instructions that I should enable dccifd if I use spamassassin. 
So I did. Now I get the following errors in my logs:

Jul  6 00:27:21 testserv dccifd[28725]: something running with socket 
at /var/dcc/dccifd; fatal error
Jul  6 00:27:21 testserv dccifd[9824]: truncated request
Jul  6 01:27:16 testserv dccifd[31941]: getpwnam(490): No such file or 
directory

Is it really necessary to enable dccifd? If yes, what will I do to avoid these 
errors?

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Bye
Stefan

Re: dccifd and spamassassin

Posted by Graham Murray <gr...@gmurray.org.uk>.

Stefan Jakobs <st...@rus.uni-stuttgart.de> writes:

> To me it seams as though spamassassin uses allways dccproc. And it
> competes with dccifd.

If it is available, spamassassin will use dccifd in preference to
dccproc.

Re: dccifd and spamassassin

Posted by Stefan Jakobs <st...@rus.uni-stuttgart.de>.

Am Sonntag, 8. Juli 2007 15:20 schrieb Mikael Syska:
> Hi,

Hello Mikael,

thank you for the answer.
I just wondered why rhyolite suggest on their website to enable dccifd when 
used with spamassassin. 
To me it seams as though spamassassin uses allways dccproc. And it competes 
with dccifd. 
I just want to know what happens there and why I get these errors.

Greetings
Stefan

> from the mailscanner page:
> http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:anti_spam:spamassass
>in:plugins:dcc:dccifd_install&amp;do=diff1162335096
>
> Dccifd(8) is similar to dccproc but is not run separately for each mail
>      message and so is far more efficient.  It receives mail messages via a
>      socket somewhat like dccm, but with a simpler protocol that can be
> used by Perl scripts or other programs.
>
> Vernon Schryver
>
> dccproc involves a fork() and exec() and then sending the message through
> a pipe to the child process and receiving the answer.
> dccifd need only send the message over UNIX domain socket to a daemon
> and receiving the answer.
>
> Dccproc must open, validate, and mmap() the whiteclnt and whiteclnt.dccw
> files, while dccifd caches open files and mmap() regions.
> Dccproc also creates creates a socket to talk to the DCC server while
> dccifd caches open sockets.
>
> Hopes that answers your question ... so if you have a smal mail gw ... I
> dont see the point in running the daemon, if there are plenty of resources.
>
> // ouT
>
> Stefan Jakobs wrote:
> > Hello list,
> >
> > I'm using Spamassassin 3.1.8 with amavisd-new 2.3.3 and postfix 2.4.3 on
> > a mailrelay. Some days ago I installed a new version of DCC. And saw in
> > the installation instructions that I should enable dccifd if I use
> > spamassassin. So I did. Now I get the following errors in my logs:
> >
> > Jul  6 00:27:21 testserv dccifd[28725]: something running with socket
> > at /var/dcc/dccifd; fatal error
> > Jul  6 00:27:21 testserv dccifd[9824]: truncated request
> > Jul  6 01:27:16 testserv dccifd[31941]: getpwnam(490): No such file or
> > directory
> >
> > Is it really necessary to enable dccifd? If yes, what will I do to avoid
> > these errors?
> >
> > Any help is greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Bye
> > Stefan

Re: dccifd and spamassassin

Posted by Mikael Syska <mi...@syska.dk>.

Hi,

from the mailscanner page:
http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:anti_spam:spamassassin:plugins:dcc:dccifd_install&amp;do=diff1162335096

Dccifd(8) is similar to dccproc but is not run separately for each mail
     message and so is far more efficient.  It receives mail messages via a
     socket somewhat like dccm, but with a simpler protocol that can be used
     by Perl scripts or other programs.

Vernon Schryver 

dccproc involves a fork() and exec() and then sending the message through
a pipe to the child process and receiving the answer.
dccifd need only send the message over UNIX domain socket to a daemon
and receiving the answer.

Dccproc must open, validate, and mmap() the whiteclnt and whiteclnt.dccw
files, while dccifd caches open files and mmap() regions.
Dccproc also creates creates a socket to talk to the DCC server while
dccifd caches open sockets. 

Hopes that answers your question ... so if you have a smal mail gw ... I 
dont see the point in running the daemon, if there are plenty of resources.

// ouT

Stefan Jakobs wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I'm using Spamassassin 3.1.8 with amavisd-new 2.3.3 and postfix 2.4.3 on a 
> mailrelay. Some days ago I installed a new version of DCC. And saw in the 
> installation instructions that I should enable dccifd if I use spamassassin. 
> So I did. Now I get the following errors in my logs:
>
> Jul  6 00:27:21 testserv dccifd[28725]: something running with socket 
> at /var/dcc/dccifd; fatal error
> Jul  6 00:27:21 testserv dccifd[9824]: truncated request
> Jul  6 01:27:16 testserv dccifd[31941]: getpwnam(490): No such file or 
> directory
>
> Is it really necessary to enable dccifd? If yes, what will I do to avoid these 
> errors?
>
> Any help is greatly appreciated.
>
> Bye
> Stefan
>