Re: To hack or not to hack
On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 10:24:25AM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> I am not clear how I should deal with bug #155576.
>
> amavisd-new upstream now recommend a new procedure for using exim with
> amavisd-new. The old procedure is no longer recommended.
>
> However, the new procedure does not work with the old version of exim
> that is in Debian.
>
> So I have been asked to include a copy of the old README.exim, as
> I was told that procedure still worked. See bug #154318.
>
> Now, in bug #155576 I have been told that the new procedure does not
> work without a minor modification to the amavis code.
I have implemented this same method at my site. I also ran into a looping
problem, and I solved it by using this condition:
condition = "${if or {{eq {$received_protocol}{scanned-ok}} \
{eq {$received_protocol}{local}}}\
{0}{1}}"
instead of the supplied one. This may not be a complete fix, but it solved
the problem that I encountered.
> ... A modification that would get lost if the package is upgraded.
I only set this:
$forward_method = \&mail_via_pipe;
$sendmail_wrapper = "/usr/sbin/exim";
$sendmail_wrapper_args = "-oMr scanned-ok -i";
in /etc/amavisd.conf. Sure that will be preserved across upgrades.
> ... A modification that would also break the newer recommended procedure
> with the newer versions of exim (AFAIK).
>
> What should I do?
>
> Would it be OK to simply reference the bug report at the top of
> README.exim.old until the new version of exim makes it into Debian?
Honestly, I find the idea of using pipes much more palatable than sending
the message over SMTP twice back and forth to the local host, just to scan
it for viruses. I hope that this method is not entirely deprecated in the
latest releases.
--
- mdz
Reply to: