I found some posts on the web indicating that, if spamd is having
trouble doing DNS resolution, it's probably because of a bum entry in
/etc/resolv.conf. I don't think that's the case here, though, so I'm
coming to the list...
My logs are full of runs like this:
dns: sendto() to [127.0.0.1]:53 fa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Trying to compile/build SA/latest from cpan on a BananaPi/Raspbian

Vastaanottaja SpamAssassin Users 
Päiväys Tänään 21:24
Liitetiedostot
Digitaalinen allekirjoitus (181 t)
Show options
Viestin runko
Vahvistettu allekirjoitus lähettäjältä Jari Fredri
sa_compile tests fail.
t/sa_compile.t 1/? # Failed test 1 in
t/sa_compile.t at line 149 Not found: FOO = check: tests=FOO at
t/sa_compile.t line 150. # Failed test 2 in t/SATest.pm at line 755
'/root/.cpan/build/Mail-SpamAssassin-3.4.1-1/t/log/d.sa_compile/inst.basic/foo//loc
On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:16:43 -0400
Joe Quinn wrote:
> On 9/26/2016 8:54 AM, RW wrote:
> > Informational rules do that, but IIRC __RULES are simply a special
> > case.
> >
> Hmm, you're probably right on that point. I can't find anything in
> the source that behaves that way, but the documentatio
On 9/26/2016 8:54 AM, RW wrote:
Informational rules do that, but IIRC __RULES are simply a special
case.
Hmm, you're probably right on that point. I can't find anything in the
source that behaves that way, but the documentation claims that's how it
works and I also don't see anything to suppor
On Mon, 26 Sep 2016 08:26:27 -0400
Joe Quinn wrote:
> On 9/25/2016 9:25 PM, Sean Greenslade wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 07:57:37PM -0400, Alex wrote:
> >> I think the rule still has a use, perhaps in a meta or something.
> > I believe (though don't quote me on this) that a zero-weight r
On 9/25/2016 9:25 PM, Sean Greenslade wrote:
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 07:57:37PM -0400, Alex wrote:
I think the rule still has a use, perhaps in a meta or something.
I believe (though don't quote me on this) that a zero-weight rule will
still be checked if it's used as part of a metarule.
--Sea
On 26.09.16 10:21, Maik Linnemann wrote:
Additional: i have a limited number of Mails that are still not tagged.
those mails doesnt regard to the mail size limit scenario as they are for
example between 35kb ans 100kb or so and i have a limit of 2MB. anyone
have a clue how to figure out whats ha
Additional: i have a limited number of Mails that are still not tagged. those
mails doesnt regard to the mail size limit scenario as they are for example
between 35kb ans 100kb or so and i have a limit of 2MB. anyone have a clue how
to figure out whats happening?
conspicuous most of those mails
