--On Friday, October 17, 2003 8:48 AM -0400 Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-2.60-1.i386.rpm
spamassassin-tools-2.60-1.i386.rpm
spamassassin-2.60-1.i386.rpm
What does perl-Mai do? I assume all three need to be installed?
SA is essentially a suite of Perl modules, with dr
To: 'Larry Gilson'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamassassin updates
>
>
> Because I installed SpamAssassin through cpan, does that mean
> I have all that is included in spamassassin-tools-2.60-1.i386.rpm ?
>
> -Original Message-
>
E: [SAtalk] Spamassassin updates
Hi Chris,
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 8:49 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamassassin updates
>
>
> > rpmbuild -ta Mail-Spamassassin-2.60.tar.gz
Hi Chris,
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 8:49 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamassassin updates
>
>
> > rpmbuild -ta Mail-Spamassassin-2.60.tar.gz
>
> Thanks
> rpmbuild -ta Mail-Spamassassin-2.60.tar.gz
Thanks for that tip. Running it produced:
perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-2.60-1.i386.rpm
spamassassin-tools-2.60-1.i386.rpm
spamassassin-2.60-1.i386.rpm
What does perl-Mai do? I assume all three need to be installed?
--
x27;SA'
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamassassin updates
>
>
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Larry Gilson wrote:
> > The sequence I use is :
> > 1) perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-vers#
> > 2) spamassassin-tools-vers#
> > 3) spamassassin-vers#
>
> Next 'duh' que
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Larry Gilson wrote:
> The sequence I use is :
> 1) perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-vers#
> 2) spamassassin-tools-vers#
> 3) spamassassin-vers#
Next 'duh' question: What IS 'spamassassin-tools'? I didn't install it.
Was it also included in the RH9 default spamassassin-2.44? Is it
import
--On Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:40 PM -0400 Terry Milnes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're gonna have to excuse my ignorance here but I have to wonder how this
> is done, presently for apache I do a pre configure then do the openssl, ssl
> mod and perl mod, then pass 15 parameters onto the con
s.
--Larry
-Original Message-
From: Terry Milnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 12:45 PM
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamassassin updates
Hold it a sec, not all rpms contain the source, in fact unless things
have changed I thought that most
--On Thursday, October 16, 2003 2:25 PM -0400 Larry Gilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Regardless, issuing an 'rpm --rebuild' on the
> RPMS is building from source and installing the resulting binary RPM is
> installing from a source that was made on the target machine.
If the original author wa
You should really try rug/rc from ximian they have made installing
anything on a redhat system as quick as typing
rug install spamassassin
it will fetch and install all of the dependencies and you can do
something else or if you use slackware you can use swaret that is
very similar but
tall from source
because it is better. RPMS is just a different format of exactly the same
process.
--Larry
> -Original Message-
> From: Terry Milnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 12:45 PM
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamas
At 12:45 10/16/2003 -0400, Terry Milnes wrote:
Hold it a sec, not all rpms contain the source, in fact unless things have
changed I thought that most contained precompiled binaries, and that was
the problem with them.
Correct. Source RPMS (.src.rpm) have the source; otherwise (unless it's a
perl
> -Original Message-
> From: Terry Milnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>For some strange reason I always like the source. I think it
> >>goes back to my
> >>childhood, when mom said "Why do you have to do everything
> >>the hard way?"
> >>:-)
>
> Simple, it's so you have a better unde
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Chris Santerre
> > Sent: 16 October 2003 14:48
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamassassin updates
> >
> >
> > The topic of updates has come up ev
l Message-
From: Darren Coleman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:28 AM
To: Chris Santerre; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamassassin updates
I'm Linux SysAdmin at the company I work for, I always
install everything from source. A colleague, a Windows
Sys
Perhaps its time for me to re-visit rpms. If enough people would
smarten up and get off the MS bandwagon, I would have a reason to want
to improve my existing method of installations. As it is now though
with aprox 1/2 dozen servers per year, I think it would be more time
consuming.
Alan Hod
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 12:09:36PM -0400, Terry Milnes wrote:
> Personally I don't see how its possible to run a customized server using
> rpms only.
>
You need to build your own RPM's for stuff that isn't already packaged
or for software that you want special optimizations or options.
It's more
Darren Coleman wrote:
I'm Linux SysAdmin at the company I work for, I always install
everything from source.
A colleague, a Windows SysAdmin, installs everything on his Linux boxes
from RPMs.
Personally I don't see how its possible to run a customized server using
rpms only.
A windows system admi
an [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:28 AM
> To: Chris Santerre; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamassassin updates
>
>
> I'm Linux SysAdmin at the company I work for, I always
> install everything from source. A colleague, a Windows
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003, Darren Coleman wrote:
> I'm Linux SysAdmin at the company I work for, I always install
> everything from source. A colleague, a Windows SysAdmin, installs
> everything on his Linux boxes from RPMs.
>
> What does that tell you? :)
That it depends :-)
> Although I like the co
> -Original Message-
>
> I'm Linux SysAdmin at the company I work for, I always
> install everything from source.
> A colleague, a Windows SysAdmin, installs everything on his
> Linux boxes from RPMs.
>
> What does that tell you? :)
>
Tells me we need a larger sample size. I'm a Wind
t; To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Spamassassin updates
>
>
> The topic of updates has come up every new version of SA. You have 3
> options:
>
> 1) Source
> 2) RPM
> 3) CPAN
>
> For some strange reason I always like the source. I think it
> goes b
The topic of updates has come up every new version of SA. You have 3
options:
1) Source
2) RPM
3) CPAN
For some strange reason I always like the source. I think it goes back to my
childhood, when mom said "Why do you have to do everything the hard way?"
:-)
Anywho, I would love to see this subj
gt; Cc: Charles Gregory; 'SA'
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamassassin updates
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 04:25:10PM -0400, Larry Gilson wrote:
> > spamassassin-tools depends on perl-Mail-SpamAssassin. So I wind
> > up having to use the --nodeps option:
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Theo Van Dinter
> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 5:03 PM
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 04:57:33PM -0400, Gilson, Larry wrote:
> > You have done this way more than I. I just feel cozy
> > updating one RPM at a
>
> A little bit. ;)
>
> > time. I like increm
--On Wednesday, October 15, 2003 3:50 PM -0400 Charles Gregory
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The docs say that 'local.cf' will not be affected by updates - it's the
> "safe" place to put your local rules. Those error messages would seem to
> suggest that is not quite true.
That depends on how your
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:25:10 -0400 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Larry Gilson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The sequence I use is :
> 1) perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-vers#
> 2) spamassassin-tools-vers#
> 3) spamassassin-vers#
Why not simply rpm -Uvh spamassassin.rpm spamassassin-tools.rpm
perl-Mail-SpamAssassin.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 04:25:10PM -0400, Larry Gilson wrote:
> spamassassin-tools depends on perl-Mail-SpamAssassin. So I wind up having
> to use the --nodeps option:
> rpm -Uvh --nodeps something.rpm
Ewww!
> The sequence I use is :
> 1) perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-vers#
> 2) spamassassin-tools-ve
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 04:57:33PM -0400, Gilson, Larry wrote:
> You have done this way more than I. I just feel cozy updating one RPM at a
A little bit. ;)
> time. I like increments. I almost feel like an old man writing like that!
I can understand that. I figure you should never have to us
The sequence I use is :
1) perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-vers#
2) spamassassin-tools-vers#
3) spamassassin-vers#
--Larry
> -Original Message-
> From: Theo Van Dinter
> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 3:34 PM
> To: Charles Gregory
> Cc: 'SA'
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spa
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 02:59:58PM -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
> > And now that I look at it, that particular file is my local.cf that I
> > didn't want over-written! So does this mean it aborts, is half way done,
> > or WHAT? Have I just munched my S
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 02:59:58PM -0400, Charles Gregory wrote:
> And now that I look at it, that particular file is my local.cf that I
> didn't want over-written! So does this mean it aborts, is half way done,
> or WHAT? Have I just munched my Spamassassin 2.44? Could someone please
> post COMPLE
33 matches
Mail list logo
