Bug#171409: marked as done (spamoracle: Loosing links to word database)
Your message dated Sat, 18 Oct 2014 15:22:20 +0200
with message-id <20141018132219.GB26811@free.fr>
and subject line SpamOracle - wontfix
has caused the Debian Bug report #171409,
regarding spamoracle: Loosing links to word database
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
171409: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=171409
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: spamoracle
Version: 1.2-2
Severity: normal
Spamoracle should not delete and recreate its word database, instead
it should create a temporary file, and then copy it to the previous
file. This would make it possible to use the same database for all my
usernames. With the current method, the owner and permissions of the
file always changes back to the original.
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Kernel Version: Linux chewing 2.4.18 #11 Wed Nov 20 19:32:18 CET 2002 i686 unknown unknown GNU/Linux
Versions of the packages spamoracle depends on:
ii libc6 2.3.1-5 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and Timezone
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
tags 171409 + wontfix
tags 341704 + wontfix
stop
Spamoracle no longer actively developed since 2003 (according to its
maintainer). The only change is accepted: corrections security breaches or
corruptions of the database.
On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 11:41:38 +0200, Xavier Leroy wrote:
> De manière générale, SpamOracle n'est plus développé depuis longtemps
> (dernière release en 2003) et tout juste maintenu. S'il y avait un
> gros problème (trou de sécurité, corruption de la base de données),
> les deux autres mainteneurs (*) et moi ferions un correctif et une
> release. Mais ce n'est pas le cas ici.
> Par ailleurs, nous "upstream" n'avons jamais testé SpamOracle avec
> autre chose que procmail. Si ça marche avec qmail ou autre, tant
> mieux pour l'utilisateur, mais "upstream" ne s'engage pas là dessus.
>
> (*) Voir https://forge.ocamlcore.org/projects/spamoracle/
--
Stéphane Aulery
--- End Message ---
Reply to: