Hello Matus,
Tuesday, February 25, 2025, 9:12:20 AM, you wrote:
MUf> Yeah, typical googlegroups.com spam.
MUf> This is abused for over a decade.
So maybe mail from googlegroups should no longer get a -1 score?
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
Hello
Been getting a lot of spam hitting this rule recently, guess the spammers are
starting to use common list managers to send their rubbish.
Return-Path:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on iron.holtain.net
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.3 required=4.5 au
Hello Giovanni,
Thursday, January 30, 2025, 2:28:18 PM, you wrote:
gpi> Paypal[.]com has been removed from default WL in November
(https://github.com/apache/spamassassin/commit/76906e0c7c064391bf832b3eb885ae74aed6c8b5)
gpi> With updated rules USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL should not hit.
Though paypal.
Hello Greg,
Thursday, January 30, 2025, 2:45:09 PM, you wrote:
GT> Thanks. I should have looked in current data. People using old
GT> distribution-provided SA is a real problem, but one that doesn't seem
GT> fixable.
Ah, I had the wrong path in crontab to sa-update
This should sort the upda
Hello Tom,
Thursday, January 30, 2025, 1:47:40 AM, you wrote:
TWvu> Also, I noticed Spamassassin 3.4.6 is being used. Would Spamassassin 4.0
have done a better job at processing these headers?
Under CentOS 9 that's the version one gets with dnf install spamassassin.
--
Best regards,
Niamh
Hello Greg,
Wednesday, January 29, 2025, 12:28:13 PM, you wrote:
GT> - 1) this email was emitted from paypal's mail system
GT> - 2) paypal's DKIM signing key is compromised
GT> - 3) spamassassin is misparsing DKIM
GT> - 4) something else
GT> I would take the message and run it through SA
Hello
Given the From: address can be so easily faked is a rule testing its validity a
great idea?
Headers-
Return-Path:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on iron.holtain.net
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.5 required=4.5 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
X-Spa
Hello Bill,
Tuesday, September 17, 2024, 7:15:49 PM, you wrote:
BC> You should upgrade to 4.0.1. That error on that line indicates that you are
running an obsolete 3.4.x version.
As far as that goes I'm just waiting to hear what the host of our VM says about
updating it, as CentOS7 went EOL
Hello Bill,
Tuesday, September 17, 2024, 7:15:49 PM, you wrote:
BC> The likely root cause there is the lack of any reply from the Pyzor server,
which is unlikely to be a per-user
BC> condition.
But another user logs this-
procmail: Match on "< 512000"
procmail: Locking "spamassassin.lock"
pr
Hello
I'm seeing the following logged by Procmail in one and only one mailbox and as
far as I can see there is no difference in the Procmail recipe calling
Spamassassin in all the mailboxes
Procmail: Match on "< 256000"
procmail: Locking "spamassassin.lock"
procmail: Executing "/usr/local/bi
Hello Matija,
Sunday, April 3, 2022, 11:13:13 PM, you wrote:
MN> For closer example to yours requirements then, perhaps look into
72_active.cf
MN> regex for RCVD_IN_IADB_LISTED
So you suggest [26] instead of (2|6)
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.
Hello Matija,
Saturday, April 2, 2022, 7:12:42 PM, you wrote:
MN> grep -r check_rbl_sub /var/lib/spamassassin
MN> for examples of what's possible and how (e.g. 25_dnswl.cf)
Looking there I see nothing equivalent to alternates like in ordinary regexes
(2|6) for 2 or 6
--
Best regards,
Niam
Hello
Will this work to check 2 ip address responses, or do I have to write separate
ruled for 127.0.0.2 & 127.0.0.6
header __NH_HOLTRBL_X1
eval:check_rbl_sub('holtrbl-lastexternal','127.0.0.(2|6)')
--
Best regards,
Niamh mailto:ni...@fullbore.co.u
Hello Sidney,
Thursday, December 10, 2020, 11:45:34 PM, you wrote:
SM> If you got this rpm from an unofficial source who perhaps built it from the
source rpm for Spamassassin 3.4.4 in the Fedora repo, talk to whoever did that
about how they built the package and how they install it on CentOS.
Hello
Late to the party but I'm seeing Failed dependencies-
rpm -ivh spamassassin-3.4.4-1.el7.centos.x86_64.rpm
error: Failed dependencies:
perl(BSD::Resource) is needed by spamassassin-3.4.4-1.el7.centos.x86_64
perl(Net::CIDR::Lite) is needed by
spamassassin-3.4.4-1.el7.centos
Hello Bill,
Friday, June 7, 2019, 8:17:56 PM, you wrote:
BC> You are free to change this locally. See the documentation of
BC> originating_ip_headers (perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf)
I've added-
originating_ip_headers X-Yahoo-Post-IP X-Apparently-From X-SenderIP
to local.cf
However I still
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello John,
Friday, June 7, 2019, 7:48:57 PM, you wrote:
JH> X-Spam-Relays-External, not Untrusted.
Yes and it will always be the first external Received IP address,
X-Originating-IP: should net be in the chain of external IP addresses.
- --
Best
Hello RW,
Friday, June 7, 2019, 5:21:01 PM, you wrote:
R> This is the reason:
R>
>> X-Originating-IP: 162.208.32.167
R> Perhaps the rule should be modified to test for by=\S
It's certainly not a Received: header so should not be checked.
--
Best regards,
Niamh
yfair
Reply-To: edi...@members.wayfair.co.uk
To: Niamh Holding
Message-ID:
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?GARDEN_DINING_SET_*sale*._Inst?=
=?UTF-8?Q?ant_savings,_endless_options_=F0=9F=92=B0?=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_Part_2342279_1799557509.1559912744620&
Hello John,
Friday, June 7, 2019, 3:56:03 PM, you wrote:
JH> If you're getting FPs on this, I suggest you review your internal hosts.
JH> It looks for reserved IP ranges in external Received headers.
This?
* 3.3 FORGED_RELAY_MUA_TO_MX No description available.
.
.
.
X-Spam-Relays-Untrusted:
Hello
Since 27/05/19 I've been getting loads of FPs caused by this rule scoring
over 3, earlier in May and before it was scoring 0.0
Anyone know why the score has suddenly rocketed for A rule that doesn't
even have a description?
--
Best regards,
Niamh mailto:ni...@f
Hello Reindl,
Friday, September 5, 2014, 7:37:18 AM, you wrote:
RH> RP_MATCHES_RCVD removed 1.7 points
RH> is that not a little too much?
Now running at 2.1 :(
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpYFLZS4sAsN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello Reindl,
Monday, May 11, 2015, 2:57:57 PM, you wrote:
RH> complain at dnswl.org
Don't complain, report it and the listing will then be reviewed
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpKsVGuBiYkY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello John,
Saturday, April 4, 2015, 6:46:45 PM, you wrote:
JH> OK, tuned so it's less-specific about punctuation around the email address
JH> in the Subject, and it attempts to parse an email address out of the
JH> Subject if it appears prior to the To.
I'm sure this has been working after th
Hello Adam,
Wednesday, April 22, 2015, 8:47:48 AM, you wrote:
AM> Prefix: Re:, Fwd: etc. are striped before test.
Quite right too, mind the next complain will be that it isn't all caps
because of the spaces...
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgp
Hello Bowie,
Wednesday, April 1, 2015, 3:08:10 PM, you wrote:
BB> The way it's written, it will only hit if the Subject header follows the
BB> To header.
Apparently not as there is no hit for these headers-
To: ni...@fullbore.co.uk
Subject: (ni...@fullbore.co.uk) Get Life Cover from just 17p
Hello John,
Wednesday, April 1, 2015, 4:57:00 PM, you wrote:
JH> It will match if the To: or Received: header with recipient address comes
JH> first. There's not a version that tries to parse an email address out of
JH> the Subject: if that's encountered first.
Will there be to catch the exam
Hello Bowie,
Wednesday, April 1, 2015, 3:08:10 PM, you wrote:
BB> The way it's written, it will only hit if the Subject header follows the
BB> To header.
Ho Hum!
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpmInVp50o64.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello Amir,
Wednesday, April 1, 2015, 4:44:08 AM, you wrote:
AC> I'm guessing that TO_IN_SUBJ only pops when the Subject: contains the full
email address in To:
Didnit hit on this-
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 23:05:53 +
Return-Path:
Subject: ad...@holtain.co.uk
Reply-To: marketingmodelstrat..
Hello David,
Thursday, March 26, 2015, 10:56:36 AM, you wrote:
DJ> I have never had customer ask to release a message that scored 2x
DJ> above our block threshold or had a virus so these are definitely safe to
silent
DJ> discard as long as local laws allow it.
Quite, and we can and do vary the
Hello Reindl,
Thursday, March 26, 2015, 10:20:15 AM, you wrote:
RH> and everybody acting that way for mails which are not only his own
RH> should refrain from maintain a mailserver because he is playing lottery
RH> with other peolles communication
What make you think you have the right to tel
Hello David,
Thursday, March 26, 2015, 12:25:30 AM, you wrote:
DFS> that a message is either delivered
It is delivered to the appropriate place, it just happens that that place
is /dev/null
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgp63jipFQW2m.pgp
Descr
Hello Reindl,
Wednesday, March 25, 2015, 7:39:56 PM, you wrote:
RH> stop kidding or do you *really* pretend you never had a false positive?
Not that scored highly enough to be dumped rather than put in a spam
folder.
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.
Hello Reindl,
Wednesday, March 25, 2015, 5:15:22 PM, you wrote:
RH> the support calls for silent discard are more and contain more bad
RH> energy
Never been contacted by a spammer as to why their message ended up in
/dev/null
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fu
Hello Reindl,
Wednesday, March 25, 2015, 9:51:48 AM, you wrote:
RH> i don't know the UK laws but in germany it's for sure not allowed
RH> because it's legally classified identical to a postman says "meh i don't
RH> walk to go upstairs today and throw the letter away"
RH> if you pretend to pro
Hello Reindl,
Tuesday, March 24, 2015, 11:40:39 PM, you wrote:
RH> you are not allowed to silent discard mail
Could you please quote the relevant section of UK law which pertains?
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpetJrbzBVhg.pgp
Description: PG
Hello RW,
Sunday, January 25, 2015, 10:55:59 PM, you wrote:
R> There's not much that can be done about this other than rescore or
R> remove it entirely.
But this rule and MISSING_HEADERS combine to score 3.8 just because the
sender put all the recipients in BCC
Seems a touch high for this.
-
Hello
Sample at http://pastebin.com/mEFpUeS5
--
Best regards,
Niamh mailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpe8wUMrN5Vl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello Reindl,
Tuesday, December 2, 2014, 6:14:26 PM, you wrote:
RH> no, i am saying nobody right in his mind is rejecting mails because
RH> *one* RBL
You do say the sweetest things!
Should I be offended given that we block at SMTP time if an IP address
is listed in just one of a chosen select
Hello Noel,
Tuesday, December 2, 2014, 4:57:08 AM, you wrote:
NB> 5.10 is only what, six years old? Surely anyone running anything older have
far greater issues
CentOS 5.11 doesn't go EOL until 2017 and it has 5.8.8
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.
Hello Ted,
Sunday, November 30, 2014, 7:50:49 PM, you wrote:
TM> assuming
TM> your package maintainers are following the new releases of SA
There's an assumption!
CentOS 6
spamassassin.x86_64 3.3.1-3.el6base
CentOS 7
spamassassin-3.3.2-18.el7.x86_64.
Hello RW,
Sunday, November 30, 2014, 5:36:57 PM, you wrote:
R> http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.4.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.txt
Cheers,google didn't help!
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=BAYESTC&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb&gfe_rd=c
Hello
Out of curiosity what are the numbers representing?
_BAYESTC_
_BAYESTCLEARNED_
_BAYESTCHAMMY_
_BAYESTCSPAMMY_
--
Best regards,
Niamh mailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpJsDJ2Je643.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello John,
Saturday, November 29, 2014, 6:21:01 PM, you wrote:
JH> This is just a warning.
I guessed given that the bayes lesrning carried on after.
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpRIalU5b7H9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello
Anyone else seen this in v3.4.0?
sa-learn --dump magic
Argument "perl_version" isn't numeric in numeric ge (>=) at (eval 530) line 2.
Argument "perl_version" isn't numeric in numeric ge (>=) at (eval 1023) line 2.
0.000 0 3 0 non-token data: bayes db version
0.0
Hello Kevin,
Thursday, November 27, 2014, 1:56:01 PM, you wrote:
KAM> May take a few more days
Seems OK-
Nov 28 04:23:05.459 [23730] dbg: diag: updates complete, exiting with code 0
Stopping spamd: [ OK ]
Starting spamd: [ OK ]
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni
Hello John,
Wednesday, November 26, 2014, 6:58:27 PM, you wrote:
JH> Hopefully it will go out
JH> tonight.
Not as of 0423-
config: invalid regexp for rule __PDS_FROM_2_EMAILS:
/^\W+([\w+.-]+\@[\w.-]+\.\w\w++)(?:[^\n\w<]{0,80})?<(?!\1)[^\n\s]*\@/i: Nested
quantifiers in regex; marked by <--
Hello John,
Wednesday, November 26, 2014, 4:56:46 PM, you wrote:
JH> Any possibility of upgrading to at least perl 5.10.0?
Not officially on CentOS 5.11 it seems as nothing newer is listed-
yum list perl
Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, priorities
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
* b
Hello Burnie,
Wednesday, November 26, 2014, 11:07:18 AM, you wrote:
B> config: invalid regexp for rule __PDS_FROM_2_EMAILS:
B> /^\W+([\w+.-]+\@[\w.-]+\.\w\w++)(?:[^\n\w<]{0,80})?<(?!\1)[^\n\s]*\@/i:
B> Nested quantifiers in regex; marked by <-- HERE in
B> m/(?i)^\W+([\w+.-]+\@[\w.-]+\.\w\w++
Hello Axb,
Wednesday, November 12, 2014, 12:21:19 PM, you wrote:
A> is your SA 3.4 working now?
A> after all this noise it would be rewarding to see some success.
Yes... as of this morning-
[root@nitrogen tmp]# cd /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/IO/Socket/
[root@nitrogen Socket]# ls
INET6.pm I
Hello Reindl,
Is you message supposed to contain some hidden meaningful information given
that all it does it give some details of your setup?
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 2:55:41 PM, you wrote:
RH> Bignum.pm
RH> Am 11.11.2014 um 15:48 schrieb Niamh Holding:
>>
>> Hello
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 23, 2014, 4:54:44 PM, you wrote:
RH> the spamassassin part of the issue was explained
But no fix provided, as far as I'm concerned everything that follows is
in pursuit of working DNS checks and when that is achieved then further
discussion would indeed be off top
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 23, 2014, 11:15:27 AM, you wrote:
RH> he old RHEL5
CentOS 5 doesn't go end of life until 2017
RH> seeing even fc6 packages
Only if offered by-
base: repo.bigstepcloud.com
* epel: mirror.bytemark.co.uk
* extras: anorien.csc.warwick.ac.uk
* rpmforge: mirror.
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 23, 2014, 11:21:56 AM, you wrote:
RH> frankly your whole quoting style is just *rude*
That's damn rich!
RH> but after seeing the mess with Fedora packages on CentOS
As you well know that was suggested by another list member!
RH> in wich context you confirmed a
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 23, 2014, 10:44:09 AM, you wrote:
RH> you don't get it - the *context* is important
You don't get it "in your own words" is stating that I have rewritten the
output myself and what I quoted was not was was on the screen!
--
Best regards,
Niamh
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 23, 2014, 10:49:01 AM, you wrote:
RH> looking 2 seconds on the output below (you stripped originally)
The original pst included-
"Package perl.i386 4:5.8.8-43.el5_11 set to be updated"
RH> i
RH> see you system want to install i386 packages on a x86_64 setup
Tha
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 23, 2014, 10:32:36 AM, you wrote:
RH> i am out of this thread - you continue to strip the context out of
RH> quotes and this is *not* a complete, uncutted console input/output
There is no point in posting superfluous stuff!
Yum has clearly stated that
Package 4:
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 23, 2014, 10:15:50 AM, you wrote:
RH> pack them in your own
RH> words
Further the original quotes are cut and paste and not IN MY OWN WORDS
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgp2PUIRR_mwv.pgp
Description: PGP signat
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 23, 2014, 10:15:50 AM, you wrote:
RH> *lease* start to post complete outputs instead pack them in your own
RH> words to help others helping you
The missing stuff!
Loaded plugins: fastestmirror
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
* base: repo.bigstepcloud
Hello Axb,
Wednesday, November 12, 2014, 12:38:00 PM, you wrote:
A> yum install
A> http://pkgs.repoforge.org/perl-Net-DNS/perl-Net-DNS-0.71-1.el5.rfx.x86_64.rpm
"yum install perl-Net-DNS" shows-
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
* base: repo.bigstepcloud.com
* epel: mirror.bytemar
Hello Reindl,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 7:52:10 PM, you wrote:
RH> "perl-5.8.8-43.el5_11.x86_64" is part of 5.11
RH> this is completly untested and unsupported < CentOS 5.11
Axb's "yum update -y" was done and I'm seeing-
Package 4:perl-5.8.8-43.el5_11.x86_64 already installed and latest vers
Hello Axb,
Wednesday, November 12, 2014, 12:21:19 PM, you wrote:
A> is your SA 3.4 working now?
A> after all this noise it would be rewarding to see some success.
Mail is still being handled by our backup server but the primary is now
back in situ
Well the server was sitting on our dining tabl
Hello Reindl,
Wednesday, November 19, 2014, 6:01:32 PM, you wrote:
RH> should there not be a "SUBJECT_EMPTY" rule
header __NH_BLANK_SUB Subject =~ /^\s*$/
describe__NH_BLANK_SUB Subject is blank
metaNH_EMPTY_SUB
Hello Noel,
Monday, November 17, 2014, 1:42:35 AM, you wrote:
NB> In the context you quote - yes,
NB> but upon reading Harry's original - *no* it was not condescending (and he
made a valid point)
Been more tactful to make it a day earlier when I pondered-
"I'm tempted to try-
yum install M
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 16, 2014, 6:54:05 PM, you wrote:
RH> download packages you can have with a yum command via http bypasses any
RH> security (MITM as well as no gpg check otherwise happens in context of yum)
That's Axb told!
--
Best regards,
Niamhmail
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 16, 2014, 6:19:03 PM, you wrote:
RH> don't get me wrong but you need first to learn how to operate your OS
Condescending or what?
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpWVDlBzQqPf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello Niamh,
Saturday, November 15, 2014, 1:43:47 PM, you wrote:
NH> yum install Mail-SPF, but all the differing advice here has made me wary.
No package Mail-SPF available.
But
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch.rpm
Installing : perl-Mail-SPF-2.
Hello Axb,
Saturday, November 15, 2014, 11:21:51 AM, you wrote:
> By now, I assume you've solved the problem
Well...
I'm tempted to try-
yum install Mail-SPF, but all the differing advice here has made me wary.
--
Best regards,
Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Hello Axb,
Friday, November 14, 2014, 7:32:17 PM, you wrote:
> What's the requiremenet?
> What does Perl Makefile.PL ask for?
The output of perl Makefile.PL is in the root message, for example-
NOTE: the optional Mail::SPF module is not installed.
--
Best regards,
Holtain
Hello Axb,
Wednesday, November 12, 2014, 12:21:19 PM, you wrote:
A> is your SA 3.4 working now?
The backup server here is now working after the ISP removed the block on
incoming port 53.
The main server arrived here by courier yesterday and I'm busy kicked the
RAID1 array so it doesn't boot fr
Hello Reindl,
Friday, November 14, 2014, 7:51:23 PM, you wrote:
> install the epel-release package on CentOS - i would call that repo
> mandatory and it *never* collides with the base-repos
repo id
base
epel
extras
rpmforge
updates
So back to yum to install?
--
Best regards,
Holtain
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 2:21:44 PM, you wrote:
> If you need need extra modules which are not provided by Centos go to
> http://pkgs.repoforge.org/
Just looking, so don't shoot me but
http://pkgs.repoforge.org/perl-Mail-SPF/
has nothing listed later than CentOS 5
PS I hate hot
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 6:56:05 PM, you wrote:
> so spamd is running?
> Something started it so now you gotta find it to make sure you can
> stop/start the service if required.
Me started it-
service spamassassin start :)
I had the init scripts in a backup from the main server
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 6:33:35 PM, you wrote:
> or are you using procmail?
Yep
:0fw spamassassin.lock
* < 512000
| /usr/local/bin/spamc -u spamtest
# | /usr/local/bin/spamassassin
# All mail with a score >10 is dumped to /dev/null
:0
* ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*
/dev/n
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 5:45:02 PM, you wrote:
> sometimes a small hint can save time and frustration...
> are you nearly there by now?
Looks not to bad, even if for reasons stated I can only test from within
the LAN-
Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: connection fr
Hello Benny,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 4:29:32 PM, you wrote:
> if there is no maintainers of spamassassin there
That's why I build from source, I'm not aware od a 3.4.0 rpm either.
--
Best regards,
Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 3:29:00 PM, you wrote:
> what about security updates?
Bash and ssl were addressed when announced.
> A spare array disk should only be a crutch till you replace the original
> disk.. simple BCP.
It's not a crutch it's booting up to how the server was 2 y
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 3:40:53 PM, you wrote:
> the lady can start a weekend knowing the box is
> tagging spam.
First I have to get the damned ISP to stop blocking port 53 so the world
knows where to send the spam.
Most of yesterday was spent trying to work out why DNS was wor
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 2:21:44 PM, you wrote:
> (do you seriously make a point of running old versions?)
If it ain't broke don't mess with it!
Given that the other server is now dead after the suggested yum update :(
Dead as in booting up from a spare disk in the raid assay wh
OS CentOS 6.4
yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6
So I'm building 3.4.0 from source but Makefile.PL reports missing
moduiles, should these be installed from CPAN?
***
NOTE: the optional Mail::SPF module is not installed.
Used to
Hello Benny,
Wednesday, November 12, 2014, 11:04:26 AM, you wrote:
BP> Search in yum for cpan 2 rpm wrappers, then build a new sa from cpan, next
BP> step is to upgrade to this localy builded sa rpm
SA has always been built from source here.
--
Best regards,
Niamh
Hello Reindl,
Wednesday, November 12, 2014, 11:42:57 AM, you wrote:
RH> yum don't touch anything which is not installed as RPM
SA was always built from source!
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpR7Vn45_D6t.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello Axb,
Wednesday, November 12, 2014, 8:41:04 AM, you wrote:
A> Just make sure you "yum remove spamassassin" or you'll have a mix/mess
Yes, though why yum "updated" stuff it didn't install is a mystery to me.
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
p
Hello Axb,
Wednesday, November 12, 2014, 8:29:16 AM, you wrote:
A> you'll have to do some manual work and the install SA 3.4 from source
That's how I have always installed SA
A> you will need a spam init script
/etc/sysconfig/spamassassin
# Options to spamd
SPAMDOPTIONS="-d -c -m5 -H -D dns"
Hello Axb,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 7:48:53 PM, you wrote:
A> yum update -y && reboot
And bind downgraded from 9.9.2P1 to 9.3.6P1
Some "update", wonder what else has been downgraded?
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpMUjQVsjZWE.pgp
Descript
Hello Axb,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 7:48:53 PM, you wrote:
A> yum update -y && reboot
Oh and no reboot despite
Complete!
Broadcast message from root (pts/1) (Wed Nov 12 08:15:55 2014):
The system is going down for reboot NOW!
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni.
Hello Axb,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 7:48:53 PM, you wrote:
A> yum update -y && reboot
Nice downgrade of SA to spamassassin.x86_64 0:3.3.1-4.el5 :(
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgp8EQI2ai_Ns.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello Axb,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 7:20:36 PM, you wrote:
A> Update your ancient Centos version to Centos 5.11
That's scary... given the server is in a data centre 250 miles away!
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpzrFhHwg7hr.pgp
Description
Hello Axb,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 7:29:57 PM, you wrote:
A> Which means? Did you run an update or not?
Fail to paste error!
Nov 09 13:15:19 Updated: 4:perl-5.8.8-43.el5_11.x86_64
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgplxkltbXGIG.pgp
Descripti
Hello Axb,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 6:37:05 PM, you wrote:
A> Did I miss this? Do we know what OS & version are you using?
This yum update "might" be connected to the problem...
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpARfMki3D5J.pgp
Description: P
Hello Reindl,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 6:55:22 PM, you wrote:
RH> nobody knows where you expect "Socket.pm" loaded from base
so where tells me which is loaded?
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpXUw5neK_Ve.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello Reindl,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 6:46:37 PM, you wrote:
RH> so mentioning "/root/.cpan/build/" make sno sense at all
find / -name Socket.pm
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgp51oScErvzv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello Axb,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 6:37:05 PM, you wrote:
A> Did I miss this? Do we know what OS & version are you using?
cat /etc/*release
CentOS release 5.4
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgp9XHgbBFk2l.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello Reindl,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 6:38:08 PM, you wrote:
RH> *you* wrote
And you made an accusation...
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpGURXZr8Iud.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello Reindl,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 6:27:05 PM, you wrote:
RH> not install software on random locations
RH> * especially not in the root's homedir
What do you think I specifically installed in arandom location and in
root's homedir?
RH> BTW: what is the "Re: ***UNCHECKED(Encrypted)***"
Hello Niamh,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 4:24:23 PM, you wrote:
NH> Socket version 1.97 required--this is only version 1.78 at
NH> /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/IO/Socket/IP.pm line 30.
OK, looks like it's using
/usr/lib64/perl5/5.8.8/x86_64-linux-thread-multi/Socket.pm
But
/root/.cpan/buil
Hello Matus,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 4:47:10 PM, you wrote:
MUf> ... as it was already said: do NOT mix manually installed CPAN modules with
MUf> packages of any kind. use either one or the other.
so don't use yum and cpan?
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@
Hello Mark,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 4:19:28 PM, you wrote:
MM> perl -le 'use IO::Socket::IP; print IO::Socket::IP->VERSION'
Socket version 1.97 required--this is only version 1.78 at
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.8/IO/Socket/IP.pm line 30.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at
/usr/lib/perl
Hello Matus,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 4:02:33 PM, you wrote:
MUf> what exactly do you install from source: perl or SA?
SA on 30 Oct 2014
MUf> ...What did you do yesterday?
23 4 * * * sa-update -D --gpgkey 6C6191E3 --channel sought.rules.yerp.org
--channel updates.spamassassin.org && /sbin
Hello Kevin,
Tuesday, November 11, 2014, 3:46:51 PM, you wrote:
KAM> Did that fix the BigNum and RSA error you logged?
No
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpesAE2KAyQJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
1 - 100 of 221 matches
Mail list logo
