[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: spamassassin 3.1.0a for volatile



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/10/2005 1:23 PM, Jesus Climent wrote:
> SpamAssassin 3.1.0a has been compiled for Sarge as part of the volatile
> effort, and is available for wider testing from
> debian.pumuki.org/spamassassin-volatile
> 
> If You can  give it a try to see if there are some remaining issues with the
> package, it would be great.
> 
> Please, keep in mind that the package just out off the oven, so it might burn
> your computer.

I had compiled 3.1.0 from experimental for Sarge myself a few days ago.
One issue I found that still appears in your package is that the
logcheck filters are not correct.

It seems that 3.1.0 includes an extra "spamd: " in its logs. It also
includes "prefork: child states:" messages that I chose to filter out as
well.

I've attached a patch to fix these issues if you're interested.

- --
David Rothenberger                spammer? -> spam@daveroth.dyndns.org
GPG/PGP: 0x7F67E734, C233 365A 25EF 2C5F C8E1 43DF B44F BA26 7F67 E734

I don't know what Descartes' got,
But booze can do what Kant cannot.
		-- Mike Cross
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDStentE+6Jn9n5zQRAsUyAKDidWit+fydGAT9EDNrIUacSkapBgCgpCpY
CjpejYi00ImjRmExUv1ivKM=
=deYG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--- spamassassin.logcheck.ignore.paranoid	2005-10-10 13:57:02.068845251 -0700
+++ /etc/logcheck/ignore.d.paranoid/spamassassin	2005-10-07 14:48:20.000000000 -0700
@@ -1,8 +1,9 @@
-^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]: info: setuid to [._[:alnum:]-]+ succeeded *$
-^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]: processing message .+ for [._[:alnum:]-]+:[0-9]+\. *$
-^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]: connection from [._[:alnum:]-]+ \[[.0-9]+\] at port [0-9]+ *$
-^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]: (clean message|identified spam) \([-0-9.]+/[-0-9.]+\) for [._[:alnum:]-]+:[0-9]+ in [0-9.]+ seconds, [0-9]+ bytes\. *$
-^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]: result:
-^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]: server hit by SIGCHLD$
-^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]: handled cleanup of child pid [0-9]+$
-^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]: server successfully spawned child process, pid [0-9]+$
+^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]:( spamd:)?( info:)? setuid to [._[:alnum:]-]+ succeeded *$
+^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]:( spamd:)? processing message .+ for [._[:alnum:]-]+:[0-9]+\.? *$
+^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]:( spamd:)? connection from [._[:alnum:]-]+ \[[.0-9]+\] at port [0-9]+ *$
+^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]:( spamd:)? (clean message|identified spam) \([-0-9.]+/[-0-9.]+\) for [._[:alnum:]-]+:[0-9]+ in [0-9.]+ seconds, [0-9]+ bytes\. *$
+^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]:( spamd:)? result:
+^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]:( spamd:)? server hit by SIGCHLD$
+^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]:( spamd:)? handled cleanup of child pid [0-9]+$
+^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]:( spamd:)? server successfully spawned child process, pid [0-9]+$
+^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]: prefork: child states:
--- spamassassin.logcheck.violations.ignore	2005-10-10 13:57:02.068845251 -0700
+++ /etc/logcheck/violations.ignore.d/spamassassin	2005-10-07 14:48:20.000000000 -0700
@@ -1 +1 @@
-^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]: result:
+^\w{3} [ :0-9]{11} [._[:alnum:]-]+ spamd\[[0-9]+\]:( spamd:)? result:

Reply to: