Re: sa-update

On 17 Mar 2023, at 16:03, Bill Cole wrote: Correct. We've had a problem with RuleQA, in that we have not had enough spam in the masscheck submissions to run the rescoring properly. I'm not sure whose submissions have dried up... The existing list of active rules and their scores is fine for n

Re: sa-update

On 2023-03-17 at 05:11:30 UTC-0400 (Fri, 17 Mar 2023 10:11:30 +0100) SA list is rumored to have said: Hello, I didn't get an update since 5 March (1908044). Correct. We've had a problem with RuleQA, in that we have not had enough spam in the masscheck submissions to run the rescoring proper

Re: sa-update error 3 no mirrors.sought.rules.yerp.org

--On Sunday, March 14, 2021 1:23 PM +1000 Simon Wilson wrote: You've not stated your OS but on a RHEL/CentOS 7 box the correct way to remove is to go to /etc/mail/spamassassin/channel.d and delete sought.conf. RHEL bugzilla for the issue:

Re: sa-update error 3 no mirrors.sought.rules.yerp.org

- Message from a...@onet.eu - Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 13:16:25 +0100 From: a...@onet.eu Subject: sa-update error 3 no mirrors.sought.rules.yerp.org To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Hi, I'm getting this from cron since two days: channel: no 'mirrors.sought.rules.yerp.org'

Re: sa-update error 3 no mirrors.sought.rules.yerp.org

Sought rules have been deprecated at least 5 years ago. you can remove that part of the config. h2h Axb On 3/12/21 1:16 PM, a...@onet.eu wrote: Hi, I'm getting this from cron since two days: channel: no 'mirrors.sought.rules.yerp.org' record found, channel failed 11-Mar-2021 05:46:59: SpamAssas

Re: sa-update for versions 3.4.2 and older fail lint because of description on non-existent rule was Re: update fail

Kevin A. McGrail skrev den 2020-07-18 23:32: Great, thanks for the update. With this change we also know how to best prevent similar issues. more nutella :=)

Re: sa-update for versions 3.4.2 and older fail lint because of description on non-existent rule was Re: update fail

Great, thanks for the update. With this change we also know how to best prevent similar issues. Regards, KAM -- Kevin A. McGrail Member, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171 On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 4:59 PM Marc

Re: sa-update for versions 3.4.2 and older fail lint because of description on non-existent rule was Re: update fail

Am Donnerstag, den 16.07.2020, 17:43 -0400 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail: > Agreed. 1879851 is after I submitted the fix but doesn;t include the > fix. I will have to check again after the next rule publishing. > Sorry for the false alarm. Feedback: sa-update without errors now. Thanks a lot! Cheer

Re: sa-update for versions 3.4.2 and older fail lint because of description on non-existent rule was Re: update fail

Agreed. 1879851 is after I submitted the fix but doesn;t include the fix. I will have to check again after the next rule publishing. Sorry for the false alarm. -- Kevin A. McGrail Member, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail -

Re: sa-update for versions 3.4.2 and older fail lint because of description on non-existent rule was Re: update fail

Am Mittwoch, den 15.07.2020, 08:11 -0400 schrieb Kevin A. McGrail: > Just an update that this is fixed: > > https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7840 > > Should be a rule update published in the next 48 hours with the fix. > Feedback welcome because we are making fixes for older ve

Re: sa-update failing

Stephan, The type for the update record is a TXT not an A record, so dig -t txt 3.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org. I'm not sure if an update has failed for the past 2 days though so this is just a comment on how to check manually. ;; ANSWER SECTION: 3.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org. 3600 IN TXT

Re: sa-update failing

It queries TXT records $ dig TXT 2.4.3.updates.spamassassin.org ;; ANSWER SECTION: 2.4.3.updates.spamassassin.org. 3424 IN CNAME 3.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org. 3.3.3.updates.spamassassin.org. 79 IN TXT "1879105" It is normal that updates might be stale for a few days sometimes. Use "

Re: SA-Update cronjob output rejected by ISP for containing spam

On Sat, 2019-06-22 at 16:10 -0700, John Hardin wrote: > On Sat, 22 Jun 2019, Chris Pollock wrote: > > > On Sat, 2019-06-22 at 10:29 -0700, John Hardin wrote: > > > On Sat, 22 Jun 2019, Chris Pollock wrote: > > > > > > > I'm not sure how to exactly word the problem so the subject is > > > > the >

Re: SA-Update cronjob output rejected by ISP for containing spam

On Sat, 2019-06-22 at 16:10 -0700, John Hardin wrote: > On Sat, 22 Jun 2019, Chris Pollock wrote: > > > On Sat, 2019-06-22 at 10:29 -0700, John Hardin wrote: > > > On Sat, 22 Jun 2019, Chris Pollock wrote: > > > > > > > I'm not sure how to exactly word the problem so the subject is > > > > the >

Re: SA-Update cronjob output rejected by ISP for containing spam

On Sat, 22 Jun 2019, Chris Pollock wrote: On Sat, 2019-06-22 at 10:29 -0700, John Hardin wrote: On Sat, 22 Jun 2019, Chris Pollock wrote: I'm not sure how to exactly word the problem so the subject is the best I can do for now. Whenever a crojob is run a message is sent out via postfix to me

Re: SA-Update cronjob output rejected by ISP for containing spam

On Sat, 2019-06-22 at 10:29 -0700, John Hardin wrote: > On Sat, 22 Jun 2019, Chris Pollock wrote: > > > I'm not sure how to exactly word the problem so the subject is the > > best > > I can do for now. Whenever a crojob is run a message is sent out > > via > > postfix to me with the contents of th

Re: SA-Update cronjob output rejected by ISP for containing spam

On Sat, 22 Jun 2019, Chris Pollock wrote: I'm not sure how to exactly word the problem so the subject is the best I can do for now. Whenever a crojob is run a message is sent out via postfix to me with the contents of that cronjob. This morning when the SA-Update cronjob was run I didn't receive

Re: SA-Update cronjob output rejected by ISP for containing spam

Chris Pollock skrev den 2019-06-22 19:03: https://pastebin.com/hHR0Rvii accepted and bounced ? if yes fix that

Re: sa-update when were last updates made?

thanks for your info, sincerely, most helpful. I will look into my setup over the next week or so, as its clearly a bit weird! a few typos in my message, which I corrected - my old eyes are in need of an update too -- Sent from: http://spamassassin.1065346.n5.nabble.com/SpamAssassin-Users-f

Re: sa-update when were last updates made?

On 24 Jan 2019, at 8:44, LegendGamesMaster wrote: Reindl - thanks. Note that anything you get from H. Reindl in reply to messages on this mailing list is not actually posted to the mailing list. just checked and yes, i'm updated. however... i'm confused as to what rules are being used in

Re: sa-update when were last updates made?

On 24.01.19 06:44, LegendGamesMaster wrote: The files in /var/lib/spamassassin/3.0014000/ are clearly todays update, except for a directory sought_rules_yerp_org which is 18/10/2018 afaik this project is unfortunately dead I note that I have a load of files in /usr/share/spamassassin that are

Re: sa-update when were last updates made?

Reindl - thanks. just checked and yes, i'm updated. however... i'm confused as to what rules are being used in preference... The files in /var/lib/spamassassin/3.0014000/ are clearly todays update, except for a directory sought_rules_yerp_org which is 18/10/2018 I note that I have a load of fil

Re: sa-update --allow-plugins [was: sa-update not properly parsing urls in MIRRORED.BY files?]

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 02:10:37PM -0500, listsb wrote: > > that said, i don't quite follow the second statement, if i'm honest. i > suppose that some people may run sa-update or spamassassin as root, but i > don't, and would be filing bugs against any packagers or distributors that > were delive

Re: sa-update not properly parsing urls in MIRRORED.BY files?

On Jan 11, 2019, at 00.24, Bill Cole wrote: > > On 10 Jan 2019, at 23:15, listsb wrote: > >> On Jan 10, 2019, at 06.05, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: >>> >>> I believe this is a known issue fixed in svn. We need to get 3.4.3 out the >>> door for this. Are you able to test with the 3.4 branch fro

Re: sa-update not properly parsing urls in MIRRORED.BY files?

On 11 Jan 2019, at 10:22, Kris Deugau wrote: Bill Cole wrote: On 10 Jan 2019, at 23:15, listsb wrote: Update available for channel sought.rules.yerp.org: -1 -> 3402014020421 And finally: that rule channel has not been updated in almost 4 years and almost surely will never be updated again.

Re: sa-update not properly parsing urls in MIRRORED.BY files?

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 10:22:13 -0500 Kris Deugau wrote: > Bill Cole wrote: > > On 10 Jan 2019, at 23:15, listsb wrote: > >> Update available for channel sought.rules.yerp.org: -1 -> > >> 3402014020421 > > > And finally: that rule channel has not been updated in almost 4 > > years and almost sur

Re: sa-update not properly parsing urls in MIRRORED.BY files?

On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 11:59:36PM -0500, listsb wrote: > > >sa-update -vvv --allowplugins ... Just a general note, I would never ever use --allowplugins unless it's your personal channel. There is no reason why official channels should ever distribute plugins as it would be basically remote cod

Re: sa-update not properly parsing urls in MIRRORED.BY files?

Bill Cole wrote: On 10 Jan 2019, at 23:15, listsb wrote: Update available for channel sought.rules.yerp.org: -1 -> 3402014020421 And finally: that rule channel has not been updated in almost 4 years and almost surely will never be updated again. I'm pretty sure it's been longer than that ev

Re: sa-update not properly parsing urls in MIRRORED.BY files?

On 10 Jan 2019, at 23:15, listsb wrote: On Jan 10, 2019, at 06.05, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: I believe this is a known issue fixed in svn. We need to get 3.4.3 out the door for this. Are you able to test with the 3.4 branch from svn? thanks. i've done a crude test just grabbing sa-update

Re: sa-update not properly parsing urls in MIRRORED.BY files?

listsb skrev den 2019-01-11 05:15: sa-update -v --allowplugins --channelfile /etc/spamassassin/sa-update-conf.d/channels.txt --gpgkeyfile /etc/spamassassin/sa-update-conf.d/sa-update-keys.txt --gpghomedir /var/lib/spamassassin/sa-update-keys Update available for channel sought.rules.yerp.org:

Re: sa-update not properly parsing urls in MIRRORED.BY files?

On Jan 10, 2019, at 06.05, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > > I believe this is a known issue fixed in svn. We need to get 3.4.3 out the > door for this. Are you able to test with the 3.4 branch from svn? thanks. i've done a crude test just grabbing sa-update from svn, with some progress: >sa-upd

Re: sa-update not properly parsing urls in MIRRORED.BY files?

W dniu 2019-01-10 o 12:05, Kevin A. McGrail pisze: > I believe this is a known issue fixed in svn.  We need to get 3.4.3 out > the door for this.  Are you able to test with the 3.4 branch from svn? https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7623

Re: sa-update not properly parsing urls in MIRRORED.BY files?

I believe this is a known issue fixed in svn. We need to get 3.4.3 out the door for this. Are you able to test with the 3.4 branch from svn? On Wed, Jan 9, 2019, 23:59 listsb hi- > > the subject expresses my uneducated hypothesis as to what might be causing > a problem i seem to have encountere

Re: sa-update is broken on updates.spamassassin.org channel [was: Re: config: warning: description exists for non-existent rule EXCUSE_24]

On 21 Dec 2018, at 15:52, Bill Cole wrote: > cd `mktemp -d -t HappyMichael???` I'd prefer you did cd `mktemp -d -t saupdate` -- I gotta straighten my face This mellow-thighed chick just put my spine out of place

Re: sa-update is broken on updates.spamassassin.org channel [was: Re: config: warning: description exists for non-existent rule EXCUSE_24]

On 12/21/18 5:52 PM, Bill Cole wrote: Fine: #!/bin/sh cd `mktemp -d -t HappyMichael???` Yes, Merry Christmas =P

Re: sa-update is broken on updates.spamassassin.org channel [was: Re: config: warning: description exists for non-existent rule EXCUSE_24]

On 21 Dec 2018, at 15:57, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 12/20/18 7:00 PM, Bill Cole wrote: >> >> mkdir /tmp/saupdate-1849156 > > Never use a fixed path under /tmp =) Fine: #!/bin/sh cd `mktemp -d -t HappyMichael???` curl -O http://sa-update.spamassassin.org/1849156.tar.gz curl -O http://sa-

Re: sa-update is broken on updates.spamassassin.org channel [was: Re: config: warning: description exists for non-existent rule EXCUSE_24]

On 12/20/18 7:00 PM, Bill Cole wrote: mkdir /tmp/saupdate-1849156 Never use a fixed path under /tmp =)

Re: sa-update is broken on updates.spamassassin.org channel [was: Re: config: warning: description exists for non-existent rule EXCUSE_24]

On 20 Dec 2018, at 17:54, Bill Cole wrote: If you cannot wait 5 more hours and have an updated SVN checkout of the 'trunk' code, you can run: make clean ; echo |perl Makefile.PL ; make build_rules That will leave a proper set of rules files in the rules/ directory. If you copy rules/72_a

Re: sa-update is broken on updates.spamassassin.org channel [was: Re: config: warning: description exists for non-existent rule EXCUSE_24]

On 20 Dec 2018, at 17:56, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: We've had a few occurrences of essentially the same problem (a bad rules package due to an ignored lint failure in a nightly update) over the past few years. In addition to correcting the problematic rule I have also fixed the script which inte

Re: sa-update is broken on updates.spamassassin.org channel [was: Re: config: warning: description exists for non-existent rule EXCUSE_24]

On 12/20/2018 5:54 PM, Bill Cole wrote: > On 20 Dec 2018, at 13:41, Bill Cole wrote: > >> This should now be fixed for the next rules update. > > And, On 20 Dec 2018, at 17:04, (ignoring an explicit Reply-To header > in a direct message to me!) Frank Giesecke wrote: > >> How can I force the rules u

Re: sa-update is broken on updates.spamassassin.org channel [was: Re: config: warning: description exists for non-existent rule EXCUSE_24]

On 20 Dec 2018, at 13:41, Bill Cole wrote: This should now be fixed for the next rules update. And, On 20 Dec 2018, at 17:04, (ignoring an explicit Reply-To header in a direct message to me!) Frank Giesecke wrote: How can I force the rules update? You cannot. The "rules update" I referre

Re: sa-update is broken on updates.spamassassin.org channel [was: Re: config: warning: description exists for non-existent rule EXCUSE_24]

On 20 Dec 2018, at 11:55, Marcus Schopen wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 20.12.2018, 12:35 +0100 schrieb Marcus Schopen: >> Hi, >> >> I get a warning, when updating the channel: >> >> -- >> config: warning: description exists for non-existent rule EXCUSE_24 >> >> channel: lint check of update fail

Re: sa-update error - config: invalid expression for rule T_MIXED_ES (fwd)

On 9 Dec 2018, at 12:50, Kevin Walton wrote: Hi I am running: SpamAssassin version 3.3.2 sa-update version svn917659 This is an unsupported obsolete version of SpamAssassin. If you are maintaining your own installation, you should update. If you are using a distribution maintained by someo

Re: sa-update and signature verification

Hi Daniele, You are correct.  3.4.2 does not support rule channels that only use SHA1. Please contact the other rule channels and tell them to add sha256.  We have moved away from SHA1.  It should be trivial on their end to generate a sha256sum. Regards, KAM On 10/2/2018 10:00 AM, Daniele Duca w

Re: SA-Update exits with code 4

On Wed, 2018-01-31 at 13:09 -0600, David Jones wrote: > On 01/30/2018 09:37 PM, Chris wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > rules: failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test, skipping: > > >   (Can't locate object method > > > "check_for_forged_gmail_received_headers" via package > > > "Mail::SpamAssassin:

Re: SA-Update exits with code 4

On 01/30/2018 09:37 PM, Chris wrote: rules: failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test, skipping:  (Can't locate object method "check_for_forged_gmail_received_headers" via package "Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus" at (eval 1327) line 1447. ) FYI. If you have a new installation of SA that d

Re: SA-Update exits with code 4

On Tue, 2018-01-30 at 21:15 -0600, David Jones wrote: > On 01/30/2018 08:04 PM, Chris wrote: > > > > Yesterday there were no issues with my once a day update. Today it > > exited with a code 4. Here is the output: > > > > https://pastebin.com/aXvk0QQu > > > > Any ideas on what seems to be the pr

Re: SA-Update exits with code 4

On 01/30/2018 08:04 PM, Chris wrote: Yesterday there were no issues with my once a day update. Today it exited with a code 4. Here is the output: https://pastebin.com/aXvk0QQu Any ideas on what seems to be the problem? Chris rules: failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test, skipping: (Can't

Re: SA-Update error "failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test"

On 01/30/2018 07:22 AM, David Jones wrote: On 01/30/2018 06:46 AM, Alex wrote: Hi, Just spotted by others, this diff fixes the problem: https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7540 Btw: what's the state of 3.4.2+? Beta? Release? from: http://spamassassin.apache.org/: Latest News

Re: SA-Update error "failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test"

On 01/30/2018 06:46 AM, Alex wrote: Hi, Just spotted by others, this diff fixes the problem: https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7540 Btw: what's the state of 3.4.2+? Beta? Release? from: http://spamassassin.apache.org/: Latest News | 2015-04-30: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 has been r

Re: SA-Update error "failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test"

On 1/30/2018 7:46 AM, Alex wrote: Now I see this check_for_forged_gmail_received_headers function was just added to the 3.4 branch in the last few days. Yes, whoever added the rule needs to be more careful.  Not saying names (or initials :-) ). Regards, KAM

Re: SA-Update error "failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test"

Hi, >> Just spotted by others, >> this diff fixes the problem: >> https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7540 > >> Btw: >> what's the state of 3.4.2+? Beta? Release? >> >> from: http://spamassassin.apache.org/: >> Latest News | 2015-04-30: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 has been released! >> >> I

Re: SA-Update error "failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test"

Hi, > Just spotted by others, > this diff fixes the problem: > https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7540 > Btw: > what's the state of 3.4.2+? Beta? Release? > > from: http://spamassassin.apache.org/: > Latest News | 2015-04-30: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 has been released! > > I didn't not

Re: SA-Update error "failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test"

Hello Giovanni, On 01/30/2018 12:55 PM, Giovanni Bechis wrote: > On 01/30/18 12:43, A. Schulze wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> shortly (since around 09:30 UTC) I get such notifications on sa-update: >> >> rules: failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test, skipping: >> (Can't locate object method "chec

Re: SA-Update error "failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test"

Giovanni Bechis: Just spotted by others, this diff fixes the problem: https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7540 yea! but that's a patch for the rules, right? may we expect a fixed ruleset will be published shortly? Andreas Btw: what's the state of 3.4.2+? Beta? Release? from

Re: SA-Update error "failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test"

On 01/30/18 12:43, A. Schulze wrote: > > Hello all, > > shortly (since around 09:30 UTC) I get such notifications on sa-update: > > rules: failed to run FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD test, skipping: > (Can't locate object method "check_for_forged_gmail_received_headers" via > package "Mail::SpamAssassi

Re: Sa-update failed

On 15 Dec 2017, at 07:21, Herbert J. Skuhra wrote: > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 04:26:45AM -0700, @lbutlr wrote: >> FreeBSD system on 11.2-RELEASE with all packages updates as of this morning >> (including a complete recompile of SA from ports). > > FreeBSD 11.1-RELEASE! You probably upgraded from 1

Re: Sa-update failed

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 04:26:45AM -0700, @lbutlr wrote: > FreeBSD system on 11.2-RELEASE with all packages updates as of this morning > (including a complete recompile of SA from ports). FreeBSD 11.1-RELEASE! You probably upgraded from 10.x and executed 'make delete-old-libs'!? Did you install pa

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

On 17 Nov 2017, at 05:32, David Jones wrote: > If I don't hear any objections or negative feedback in the next 36 hours, I > will enable DNS updates tomorrow so sa-update will start automatically > updating rulesets on Sunday morning. Excellent! -- Apple broke AppleScripting signature

Re: sa-update ruleset updates enabled again

On 11/19/2017 08:45 AM, David Mehler wrote: Hi, How does one get the new SA update rules? Thanks. Dave. Basically run the sa-update command. This should be cron'd or otherwise run automatically by whatever "glue" is calling Spamassassin. The "glue" could be an MTA like Postfix/Sendmail/

Re: sa-update ruleset updates enabled again

On 11/18/2017 09:37 PM, John Hardin wrote: On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Benny Pedersen wrote: David Jones skrev den 2017-11-18 16:26:  Heads up.  DNS updates for sa-update have been enabled again. The next  rules promotion will happen in about 11 hours around 2:30 AM UTC. heads up :=) : delivery vi

Re: sa-update ruleset updates enabled again

On 11/18/2017 09:46 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote: David Jones skrev den 2017-11-18 16:26: Heads up.  DNS updates for sa-update have been enabled again. The next rules promotion will happen in about 11 hours around 2:30 AM UTC. may i ask why you tld block me ? sorry for asking here, private mails

Re: sa-update ruleset updates enabled again

On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Benny Pedersen wrote: David Jones skrev den 2017-11-18 16:26: Heads up.  DNS updates for sa-update have been enabled again. The next rules promotion will happen in about 11 hours around 2:30 AM UTC. heads up :=) : delivery via smtp.ena.net[96.5.1.4]:25: host smtp.e

Re: sa-update ruleset updates enabled again

David Jones skrev den 2017-11-18 16:26: Heads up.  DNS updates for sa-update have been enabled again. The next rules promotion will happen in about 11 hours around 2:30 AM UTC. heads up :=) : delivery via smtp.ena.net[96.5.1.4]:25: host smtp.ena.net[96.5.1.4] said: 554 5.7.1 : Sender a

Re: sa-update ruleset updates enabled again

David Jones skrev den 2017-11-18 16:26: Heads up.  DNS updates for sa-update have been enabled again. The next rules promotion will happen in about 11 hours around 2:30 AM UTC. may i ask why you tld block me ? sorry for asking here, private mails does not work

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

On 11/17/2017 11:39 AM, Jari Fredriksson wrote: David Jones kirjoitti 16.11.2017 kello 15.22: REV=1815298 wget http://sa-update.ena.com/${REV}.tar.gz wget http://sa-update.ena.com/${REV}.tar.gz.sha1 wget http://sa-update.ena.com/${REV}.tar.gz.asc sa-update -v --install ${REV}.tar.gz +1 f

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

> David Jones kirjoitti 16.11.2017 kello 15.22: > > REV=1815298 > wget http://sa-update.ena.com/${REV}.tar.gz > wget http://sa-update.ena.com/${REV}.tar.gz.sha1 > wget http://sa-update.ena.com/${REV}.tar.gz.asc > sa-update -v --install ${REV}.tar.gz +1 for sunday. I installed this now to my fa

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

sorry +1 one for sunday On 17/11/2017 15:14, David Jones wrote: Is that +1 for Sunday start or Monday start? Dave On 11/17/2017 07:47 AM, Matthew Broadhead wrote: +1 (non binding) sounds good to me On 17/11/2017 14:45, David Jones wrote: On 11/17/2017 06:32 AM, David Jones wrote: On 11/16/

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

+1 (non binding) sounds good to me On 17/11/2017 14:45, David Jones wrote: On 11/17/2017 06:32 AM, David Jones wrote: On 11/16/2017 05:09 PM, Richard Doyle wrote: Update applied, no issues. I saw 18 testers in my web logs for yesterday's $REV.  Thanks to everyone that are helping by testin

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

On 11/17/2017 06:32 AM, David Jones wrote: On 11/16/2017 05:09 PM, Richard Doyle wrote: Update applied, no issues. I saw 18 testers in my web logs for yesterday's $REV.  Thanks to everyone that are helping by testing. On 11/16/2017 05:22 AM, David Jones wrote: Great news!  Last night's r

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

On 11/17/2017 7:32 AM, David Jones wrote: I saw 18 testers in my web logs for yesterday's $REV.  Thanks to everyone that are helping by testing. NOTE: I got many many more.  I had them update from normal sa-update though or mailed the tar files. New version today looks good.  Keep testing and ch

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

On 11/16/2017 05:09 PM, Richard Doyle wrote: Update applied, no issues. I saw 18 testers in my web logs for yesterday's $REV. Thanks to everyone that are helping by testing. On 11/16/2017 05:22 AM, David Jones wrote: Great news! Last night's run finally produced a full 72_scores.cf. Big

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

Updated mine, it seems to be working so far. On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 5:39 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > On 11/15/2017 8:27 AM, David Jones wrote: > >> >> We are getting closer to having complete rulesets working again. >> >> NOTE: The latest ruleset generated hours ago is still not quite complet

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 09:06 -0600, David Jones wrote: > On 11/16/2017 08:57 AM, Chris wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 07:22 -0600, David Jones wrote: > > > > > > Great news!  Last night's run finally produced a full > > > 72_scores.cf. > > > Big > > > thanks to Merijn van den Kroonenberg for

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

Hi, I downloaded and applied the update on CentOS 7 3.10.0-693.2.2.el7.x86_64.  spamassassin-3.4.0-2.el7.x86_64. everything seems to be working fine so far.  I will let you know if there are any issues Thanks for all the work on the update, Matthew On 16/11/2017 14:22, David Jones wrote: Grea

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

REV=1815298 wget http://sa-update.ena.com/${REV}.tar.gz wget http://sa-update.ena.com/${REV}.tar.gz.sha1 wget http://sa-update.ena.com/${REV}.tar.gz.asc sa-update -v --install ${REV}.tar.gz (reload/restart whatever is calling SA -- spamd, amavis-new, mimedefang, MailScanner, etc.) I have appli

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

On 11/16/2017 08:57 AM, Chris wrote: On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 07:22 -0600, David Jones wrote: Great news!  Last night's run finally produced a full 72_scores.cf. Big thanks to Merijn van den Kroonenberg for helping track down the remaining issues!  There were about 3 rules difference which could be

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 07:22 -0600, David Jones wrote: > Great news!  Last night's run finally produced a full 72_scores.cf. > Big  > thanks to Merijn van den Kroonenberg for helping track down the  > remaining issues!  There were about 3 rules difference which could > be  > expected with 8 months d

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

Great news!  Last night's run finally produced a full 72_scores.cf. Big thanks to Merijn van den Kroonenberg for helping track down the remaining issues!  There were about 3 rules difference which could be expected with 8 months difference. # cat disappeared_rules.txt ADVANCE_FEE_4_NEW CN_B2B_

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

On 11/15/2017 8:27 AM, David Jones wrote: We are getting closer to having complete rulesets working again. NOTE: The latest ruleset generated hours ago is still not quite complete but I think it's safe for testing.  I have applied this ruleset to my platforms. REV=1815188 wget http://sa-upd

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

On 11/14/2017 04:37 PM, Rafael Leiva-Ochoa wrote: If you need testers, please let me know, I can help. We are getting closer to having complete rulesets working again. NOTE: The latest ruleset generated hours ago is still not quite complete but I think it's safe for testing. I have applied

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

If you need testers, please let me know, I can help. On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 2:36 PM, John Hardin wrote: > On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, Rafael Leiva-Ochoa wrote: > > I am running SpamAssassin 3.4.1, and I have been trying to update the DB >> located on /var/lib/spamassassin/3.004001/ using SA-UPDATE. B

Re: SA-Update not updating DB

On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, Rafael Leiva-Ochoa wrote: I am running SpamAssassin 3.4.1, and I have been trying to update the DB located on /var/lib/spamassassin/3.004001/ using SA-UPDATE. But, it has not gotten an update in almost 2 weeks. The rules update service has been down due to infrastructure

Re: sa-update - no updates for 3 weeks?

On 4/6/2017 10:18 AM, James Hsieh wrote: Thanks very much for everyone's quick responses (and sanity checks).:) I love this .cf file, Kevin. A more advanced and sophisticated version of the one I've been accumulating for a few years! Glad it helped and I'm working on the resolution to the sa

Re: sa-update - no updates for 3 weeks?

Thanks very much for everyone's quick responses (and sanity checks). :) I love this .cf file, Kevin. A more advanced and sophisticated version of the one I've been accumulating for a few years! Thanks again! --James > On Apr 6, 2017, at 10:12 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > > On 4/6/2017 9:5

Re: sa-update - no updates for 3 weeks?

On 4/6/2017 9:50 AM, James Hsieh wrote: SpamAssassin 3.4.1, Solaris 10 I've been investigating an increase in spam leakage through my spamassassin setup, and noticed that I don't appear to have gotten any new rules updates from sa-update in several weeks. I have a cron job that runs every nig

Re: sa-update - no updates for 3 weeks?

Hi James Just to let you know it isn't just you. Tried this this morning with same result. Retried just now, where it seems to have found an update (1786640), but still doesn't update, exiting with error code 1 (no updates available), as below Apr 6 15:05:52.617 [22842] dbg: channel: usin

Re: sa-update - no updates for 3 weeks?

On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 09:50:14 -0400 James Hsieh wrote: > Hi, > > SpamAssassin 3.4.1, Solaris 10 > > I've been investigating an increase in spam leakage through my > spamassassin setup, and noticed that I don't appear to have gotten > any new rules updates from sa-update in several weeks. There h

Re: sa-update failing

Tried that when I read Kevin's message. It failed, until I unset a http_proxy env variable, which I'v now tracked down and eliminated. Everything is working fine now, thanks On 30/03/17 13:40, RW wrote: On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:45:59 +0100 Terry Stewart wrote: Hi I'm having trouble using s

Re: sa-update failing

On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:45:59 +0100 Terry Stewart wrote: > Hi > > I'm having trouble using sa-update where it says "channel: could not > find working mirror, channel failed". > > Mar 29 12:36:28.914 [12498] dbg: http: /usr/sfw/bin/wget -q > --max-redirect=2 --tries=3 --dns-timeout=20 --connect

Re: sa-update failing

Hi Kevin Thanks, that was an easy one. For some reason the shell had a http proxy set (though I couldn't see this when I ran env) So unset http_proxy fixed it. Now all I have to do is track down where this is coming from, but that's my problem nothing to do with sa-update. Regards Terry

Re: sa-update failing

On 3/30/2017 5:45 AM, Terry Stewart wrote: Mar 29 12:36:28.814 [12498] dbg: channel: found mirror http://sa-update.dnswl.org/ weight=1 Mar 29 12:36:28.814 [12498] dbg: channel: found mirror http://www.sa-update.pccc.com/ weight=5 Mar 29 12:36:28.815 [12498] dbg: channel: found mirror http://sa-

Re: sa-update failing

On Nov 22, 2016, at 10:22 AM, Larry Starr wrote: > For the past few days my daily "sa-update" job has been failing: Please do not post tiny styled HTML messages. While 9pt text may look great on your system, forcing that horrendous choice on others should be avoided. On *my* screen with my eyes

Re: sa-update failing

On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 18:34:05 bOnK wrote: > On 22-11-2016 18:22, Larry Starr wrote: > > Has there been a mirror change that I've missed? > > > For the past few days my daily "sa-update" job has been failing: > I don't know if this has anything to do with your problem, but there is > a s

Re: sa-update failing

On 22-11-2016 18:22, Larry Starr wrote: Has there been a mirror change that I've missed? For the past few days my daily "sa-update" job has been failing: I don't know if this has anything to do with your problem, but there is a sync problem with the master and slave DNS servers. -- b.

Re: sa-update errors

Am 31.08.2016 um 18:22 schrieb John Hardin: On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, li...@rhsoft.net wrote: Am 30.08.2016 um 22:03 schrieb John Hardin: On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, Joseph Brennan wrote: > We've had errors the past 2 nights for all of the uridnsbl_skip_domain > rules. It's just us? It's been fixe

Re: sa-update errors

On 2016-08-31 14:19, Groach wrote: On 31/08/2016 10:32, Axb wrote: I get no errors with spamassassin --lint Nor me. All ok. it possible already fixed ? :=) (ioT humor)

Re: sa-update errors

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, li...@rhsoft.net wrote: Am 30.08.2016 um 22:03 schrieb John Hardin: On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, Joseph Brennan wrote: > We've had errors the past 2 nights for all of the uridnsbl_skip_domain > rules. It's just us? It's been fixed, waiting for a new update to be generated by

Re: sa-update errors

On 31/08/2016 10:32, Axb wrote: I get no errors with spamassassin --lint Nor me. All ok.

Re: sa-update errors

Am 31.08.2016 um 13:18 schrieb Martin Gregorie: On Wed, 2016-08-31 at 12:25 +0200, Axb wrote: Blame it on the boogie Another data point: I haven't seen this problem. I've just searched my Considering that it doesn't seem to hit everybody, I wonder if it could be software related, i.e. con

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >