You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by snowcrash+sa <sc...@gmail.com> on 2007/12/30 09:20:44 UTC
sa 32x-branch 'make test' fails @ "t/spamc_optL.t" (among others ...) on freebsd
hi,
bldg SA 32x-branch manually, from src in a freebsd jail.
SA builds/installs/runs without noticeable issue.
but, 'make test' has scads of failures ... similar to those mentioned here:
http://www.nabble.com/Re:-Problem-with-3.2.2-p14236931.html
picking one, "t/spamc_optL.t", fails as:
% sudo -u spamd make test TEST_VERBOSE=1 TEST_FILES=t/spamc_optL.t
make -f spamc/Makefile spamc/spamc
`spamc/spamc' is up to date.
/usr/local/bin/perl build/mkrules --exit_on_no_src --src rulesrc --out
rules --manifest MANIFEST --manifestskip MANIFEST.SKIP
mkrules: no rules updated
/usr/local/bin/perl build/preprocessor -Mvars -DVERSION="3.002004"
-DPREFIX="/usr/local" -DDEF_RULES_DIR="/usr/local/etc/SA/Dist"
-DLOCAL_RULES_DIR="/usr/local/etc/SA/Local"
-DLOCAL_STATE_DIR="/usr/local/etc/SA/Updates"
-DINSTALLSITELIB="/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8"
-DCONTACT_ADDRESS="" -Msharpbang -Mconditional
-DPERL_BIN="/usr/local/bin/perl" -DPERL_WARN="" -DPERL_TAINT=""
-m755 -isa-update.raw -osa-update
cp sa-update blib/script/sa-update
/usr/local/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::MY" -e "MY->fixin(shift)" blib/script/sa-update
PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/local/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::Command::MM" "-e"
"test_harness(1, 'blib/lib', 'blib/arch')" t/spamc_optL.t
t/spamc_optL......
1..16
# Running under perl version 5.008008 for freebsd
# Current time local: Sun Dec 30 00:13:31 2007
# Current time GMT: Sun Dec 30 08:13:31 2007
# Using Test.pm version 1.25
/usr/local/bin/perl SATest.pl -Mredirect
-Olog/d.spamc_optL/spamd.err.1 -olog/d.spamc_optL/spamd.out.1 --
/usr/local/bin/perl -T -w ../spamd/spamd.raw -D -x -s stderr -C
log/test_rules_copy --siteconfigpath log/localrules.tmp -p 62704 -A
127.0.0.1 -L --allow-tell -s log/d.spamc_optL/spamd.err.1.timestamped
&
../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L spam <
data/spam/001
Killed 1 spamd instances
Waiting for spamd at pid 95478 to exit...
not ok 1
Checking learned spam
not ok 2
../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L spam <
data/spam/001
# Failed test 1 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 20
Not found: learned spam = Message successfully un/learned
# Failed test 2 in t/SATest.pm at line 662
Output can be examined in:
not ok 3
Checking already learned spam
not ok 4
/usr/local/bin/perl -T -w ../sa-learn.raw -C log/test_rules_copy
--siteconfigpath log/localrules.tmp -p log/test_default.cf --dump
magic
# Failed test 3 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 24
Not found: already learned spam = Message was already un/learned
# Failed test 4 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #2
Output can be examined in:
ERROR: Bayes dump returned an error, please re-run with -D for more information
not ok 5
Checking spam in database
not ok 6
../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L forget
< data/spam/001
# Failed test 5 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 28
Not found: spam in database = 1 0 non-token data: nspam
# Failed test 6 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #3
Output can be examined in:
not ok 7
Checking forget spam
not ok 8
../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L ham <
data/nice/001
# Failed test 7 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 32
Not found: forget spam = Message successfully un/learned
# Failed test 8 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #4
Output can be examined in:
not ok 9
Checking learned ham
not ok 10
../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L ham <
data/nice/001
# Failed test 9 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 36
Not found: learned ham = Message successfully un/learned
# Failed test 10 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #5
Output can be examined in:
not ok 11
Checking already learned ham
not ok 12
/usr/local/bin/perl -T -w ../sa-learn.raw -C log/test_rules_copy
--siteconfigpath log/localrules.tmp -p log/test_default.cf --dump
magic
# Failed test 11 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 40
Not found: already learned ham = Message was already un/learned
# Failed test 12 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #6
Output can be examined in:
ERROR: Bayes dump returned an error, please re-run with -D for more information
not ok 13
Checking ham in database
not ok 14
../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L forget
< data/nice/001
# Failed test 13 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 44
Not found: ham in database = 1 0 non-token data: nham
# Failed test 14 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #7
Output can be examined in:
not ok 15
Checking learned ham
not ok 16
# Failed test 15 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 48
Not found: learned ham = Message successfully un/learned
# Failed test 16 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #8
Output can be examined in:
Failed 16/16 subtests
Test Summary Report
-------------------
t/spamc_optL.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 16 Failed: 16)
Failed test number(s): 1-16
Files=1, Tests=16, 23 wallclock secs ( 0.01 usr 0.02 sys + 3.02 cusr
1.05 csys = 4.10 CPU)
Result: FAIL
Failed 1/1 test programs. 16/16 subtests failed.
*** Error code 255
Stop in /s/usr-local/build/spamassassin.
hints?
Re: sa 32x-branch 'make test' fails @ "t/spamc_optL.t" (among others ...) on freebsd
Posted by snowcrash+sa <sc...@gmail.com>.
> I should point out -- half of the "attention from jail users" comment has
> to do with another issue -- only people with jails can effectively test
> any potential fix. That poses a big problem for developers testing.
i think syndey's seeing it in/on non-jail osx, as well .... cref: the bug.
cheers.
Re: sa 32x-branch 'make test' fails @ "t/spamc_optL.t" (among others ...) on freebsd
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Dec 31, 2007 5:37 PM, snowcrash+sa <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Not wasted breath as long as you'll accept:
> >
> > Patches Welcome!
> >
> > as a response :)
>
> heh! you have that reponse on "auto dial", doncha? come on, now --
> fess up ;-) (p.s., i wasn't referring to those -- such as yourself --
> already *on* the 'right' side of the argument)
>
> yes. patches. once a problem is understood as actually *being* a
> problem. or just plain understood. which, in this case, it isn't.
> works on OSX, doesn't on FreeBSD/JAIL. no clue -- yet -- as to why.
>
> and, might i suggest, soliciting & accepting such patches from a
> first-timer (namely, atm, 'me'), is a questionable venture ... but
> i'll happily 'spew-n-share' if/when/how i do!
I should point out -- half of the "attention from jail users" comment has
to do with another issue -- only people with jails can effectively test
any potential fix. That poses a big problem for developers testing.
--j.
Re: sa 32x-branch 'make test' fails @ "t/spamc_optL.t" (among others ...) on freebsd
Posted by snowcrash+sa <sc...@gmail.com>.
> Not wasted breath as long as you'll accept:
>
> Patches Welcome!
>
> as a response :)
heh! you have that reponse on "auto dial", doncha? come on, now --
fess up ;-) (p.s., i wasn't referring to those -- such as yourself --
already *on* the 'right' side of the argument)
yes. patches. once a problem is understood as actually *being* a
problem. or just plain understood. which, in this case, it isn't.
works on OSX, doesn't on FreeBSD/JAIL. no clue -- yet -- as to why.
and, might i suggest, soliciting & accepting such patches from a
first-timer (namely, atm, 'me'), is a questionable venture ... but
i'll happily 'spew-n-share' if/when/how i do!
cheers.
Re: sa 32x-branch 'make test' fails @ "t/spamc_optL.t" (among others ...) on freebsd
Posted by Michael Parker <pa...@pobox.com>.
On Dec 31, 2007, at 10:23 AM, snowcrash+sa wrote:
>
>
>> but bear in mind that it will probably only get attention from
>> other jail
>> users....
>
> heh. understood. and, expected.
>
> alas, i know it's wasted breath to argue that the prevalence of SA-(&
> everything else, for that matter)-in-jails/VMs is only going to
> increase, and that this will not be an atypical use-case ... but, for
> now, NIH-syndrome, i s'pose ;-)
>
Not wasted breath as long as you'll accept:
Patches Welcome!
as a response :)
Michael
Re: sa 32x-branch 'make test' fails @ "t/spamc_optL.t" (among others ...) on freebsd
Posted by snowcrash+sa <sc...@gmail.com>.
hi justin,
> first of all, try setting the env var SPAMD_HOST to the IP address the jail can
> use for localhost.
ok.
tried that. didn't help :-/
although, take a look at the test details @
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/attachment.cgi?id=4222&action=edit
despite setting SPAMD_HOST, there's still a lot of 127.0.0.1 refs ...
and none to the IP I set. the ENV var isn't picking up -- did i bork
that as well?
> if that doesn't work open a bug
done. http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5761
> but bear in mind that it will probably only get attention from other jail
> users....
heh. understood. and, expected.
alas, i know it's wasted breath to argue that the prevalence of SA-(&
everything else, for that matter)-in-jails/VMs is only going to
increase, and that this will not be an atypical use-case ... but, for
now, NIH-syndrome, i s'pose ;-)
thanks!
cheers.
Re: sa 32x-branch 'make test' fails @ "t/spamc_optL.t" (among others ...) on freebsd
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
first of all, try setting the env var SPAMD_HOST to the IP address the jail can
use for localhost. if that doesn't work open a bug -- but bear in mind that it
will probably only get attention from other jail users.... if the
local security policy
inhibits use of localhost, the typical answer would be "well, fix the security
policy then!"
--j.
On Dec 31, 2007 12:13 AM, snowcrash+sa <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> noting that
>
> (a) these errors have appeared before
> (b) you've some suspicion that it may be related to issue w/ solaris zones
> (c) y'all are goin' great-guns on -devel wrapping up bugs for 324
>
> should i open a bug on this? or is it something that'll get some
> attention anyway?
>
> thanks!
>
>
Re: sa 32x-branch 'make test' fails @ "t/spamc_optL.t" (among others ...) on freebsd
Posted by snowcrash+sa <sc...@gmail.com>.
noting that
(a) these errors have appeared before
(b) you've some suspicion that it may be related to issue w/ solaris zones
(c) y'all are goin' great-guns on -devel wrapping up bugs for 324
should i open a bug on this? or is it something that'll get some
attention anyway?
thanks!
Re: sa 32x-branch 'make test' fails @ "t/spamc_optL.t" (among others ...) on freebsd
Posted by snowcrash+sa <sc...@gmail.com>.
hi justin,
On Dec 30, 2007 4:16 AM, Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org> wrote:
> could it be the use of 127.0.0.1, opening listening sockets there
> etc.? we have had issues
> with that and solaris zones.
one of the "joys" of FreeBSD v6.2R jails seems to be "only one IP per
jail". (there are kernel patches available for 6.3 & 7.0 PRERELEASES
.... dunno if official yet)
that said, i *CAN* ping 127.0.0.1 from within the jail.
i'll have to dig about to see if openeing sockets on localhost in a
jail is problematic. atm, i have no clue.
is there a straightforward way to have the tests use the jail's
assigned, non-localhost IP instead? or , do i need to change the src?
cheers!
Re: sa 32x-branch 'make test' fails @ "t/spamc_optL.t" (among others ...) on freebsd
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
could it be the use of 127.0.0.1, opening listening sockets there
etc.? we have had issues
with that and solaris zones.
--j.
On Dec 30, 2007 8:20 AM, snowcrash+sa <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hi,
>
> bldg SA 32x-branch manually, from src in a freebsd jail.
>
> SA builds/installs/runs without noticeable issue.
>
> but, 'make test' has scads of failures ... similar to those mentioned here:
>
> http://www.nabble.com/Re:-Problem-with-3.2.2-p14236931.html
>
> picking one, "t/spamc_optL.t", fails as:
>
> % sudo -u spamd make test TEST_VERBOSE=1 TEST_FILES=t/spamc_optL.t
> make -f spamc/Makefile spamc/spamc
> `spamc/spamc' is up to date.
> /usr/local/bin/perl build/mkrules --exit_on_no_src --src rulesrc --out
> rules --manifest MANIFEST --manifestskip MANIFEST.SKIP
> mkrules: no rules updated
> /usr/local/bin/perl build/preprocessor -Mvars -DVERSION="3.002004"
> -DPREFIX="/usr/local" -DDEF_RULES_DIR="/usr/local/etc/SA/Dist"
> -DLOCAL_RULES_DIR="/usr/local/etc/SA/Local"
> -DLOCAL_STATE_DIR="/usr/local/etc/SA/Updates"
> -DINSTALLSITELIB="/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8"
> -DCONTACT_ADDRESS="" -Msharpbang -Mconditional
> -DPERL_BIN="/usr/local/bin/perl" -DPERL_WARN="" -DPERL_TAINT=""
> -m755 -isa-update.raw -osa-update
> cp sa-update blib/script/sa-update
> /usr/local/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::MY" -e "MY->fixin(shift)" blib/script/sa-update
> PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/local/bin/perl "-MExtUtils::Command::MM" "-e"
> "test_harness(1, 'blib/lib', 'blib/arch')" t/spamc_optL.t
> t/spamc_optL......
> 1..16
> # Running under perl version 5.008008 for freebsd
> # Current time local: Sun Dec 30 00:13:31 2007
> # Current time GMT: Sun Dec 30 08:13:31 2007
> # Using Test.pm version 1.25
> /usr/local/bin/perl SATest.pl -Mredirect
> -Olog/d.spamc_optL/spamd.err.1 -olog/d.spamc_optL/spamd.out.1 --
> /usr/local/bin/perl -T -w ../spamd/spamd.raw -D -x -s stderr -C
> log/test_rules_copy --siteconfigpath log/localrules.tmp -p 62704 -A
> 127.0.0.1 -L --allow-tell -s log/d.spamc_optL/spamd.err.1.timestamped
> &
> ../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L spam <
> data/spam/001
> Killed 1 spamd instances
> Waiting for spamd at pid 95478 to exit...
> not ok 1
> Checking learned spam
> not ok 2
> ../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L spam <
> data/spam/001
> # Failed test 1 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 20
> Not found: learned spam = Message successfully un/learned
> # Failed test 2 in t/SATest.pm at line 662
> Output can be examined in:
> not ok 3
> Checking already learned spam
> not ok 4
> /usr/local/bin/perl -T -w ../sa-learn.raw -C log/test_rules_copy
> --siteconfigpath log/localrules.tmp -p log/test_default.cf --dump
> magic
> # Failed test 3 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 24
> Not found: already learned spam = Message was already un/learned
> # Failed test 4 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #2
> Output can be examined in:
> ERROR: Bayes dump returned an error, please re-run with -D for more information
> not ok 5
> Checking spam in database
> not ok 6
> ../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L forget
> < data/spam/001
> # Failed test 5 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 28
> Not found: spam in database = 1 0 non-token data: nspam
> # Failed test 6 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #3
> Output can be examined in:
> not ok 7
> Checking forget spam
> not ok 8
> ../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L ham <
> data/nice/001
> # Failed test 7 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 32
> Not found: forget spam = Message successfully un/learned
> # Failed test 8 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #4
> Output can be examined in:
> not ok 9
> Checking learned ham
> not ok 10
> ../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L ham <
> data/nice/001
> # Failed test 9 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 36
> Not found: learned ham = Message successfully un/learned
> # Failed test 10 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #5
> Output can be examined in:
> not ok 11
> Checking already learned ham
> not ok 12
> /usr/local/bin/perl -T -w ../sa-learn.raw -C log/test_rules_copy
> --siteconfigpath log/localrules.tmp -p log/test_default.cf --dump
> magic
> # Failed test 11 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 40
> Not found: already learned ham = Message was already un/learned
> # Failed test 12 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #6
> Output can be examined in:
> ERROR: Bayes dump returned an error, please re-run with -D for more information
> not ok 13
> Checking ham in database
> not ok 14
> ../spamc/spamc -F data/spamc_blank.cf -d 127.0.0.1 -p 62704 -L forget
> < data/nice/001
> # Failed test 13 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 44
> Not found: ham in database = 1 0 non-token data: nham
> # Failed test 14 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #7
> Output can be examined in:
> not ok 15
> Checking learned ham
> not ok 16
> # Failed test 15 in t/spamc_optL.t at line 48
> Not found: learned ham = Message successfully un/learned
> # Failed test 16 in t/SATest.pm at line 662 fail #8
> Output can be examined in:
> Failed 16/16 subtests
>
> Test Summary Report
> -------------------
> t/spamc_optL.t (Wstat: 0 Tests: 16 Failed: 16)
> Failed test number(s): 1-16
> Files=1, Tests=16, 23 wallclock secs ( 0.01 usr 0.02 sys + 3.02 cusr
> 1.05 csys = 4.10 CPU)
> Result: FAIL
> Failed 1/1 test programs. 16/16 subtests failed.
> *** Error code 255
>
> Stop in /s/usr-local/build/spamassassin.
>
>
>
>
> hints?
>
>
Re: sa 32x-branch 'make test' fails @ "t/spamc_optL.t" (among others ...) on freebsd
Posted by snowcrash+sa <sc...@gmail.com>.
hi matthias,
> i use CPAN on a FreeBSD 4.8 Jail to install / upgrade SA and i never
> successfuly run 'make test'
> the same goes for compiling from the sources.
>
> but i installed with 'notest install .... ' in CPAN and have no
> Problems while running SA
i've also often found that failures in 'SA's 'make test' are just
failures in the tests, and that SA ends up running well, nonetheless.
but, atm, i've 133/2048 failures (e.g., here:
http://rafb.net/p/1puesA82.html), and that concerns me a bit.
especially since this is my 1st FreeBSD install of SA.
ideally, i'd like to get them figured out / fixed.
cheers!