On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 22:15 +, RW wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 09:46:24 -0600
> David Jones wrote:
>
>
> > I bet most mirrors have a cron entry like "*/10" ... If we still
> > see
> > problems I can extend the delay some more.
>
> But the point of a longer delay is that it gives rsync a guar
On 1/11/2018 5:20 PM, Bill Cole wrote:
On 11 Jan 2018, at 12:58 (-0500), Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
And not to run GPG if we don't even download anything.
I have not had this issue myself so I all I have is the one example in
the ticket, but the logged bad hash there was for a partial download:
On 01/11/2018 04:15 PM, RW wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 09:46:24 -0600
David Jones wrote:
I bet most mirrors have a cron entry like "*/10" ... If we still see
problems I can extend the delay some more.
But the point of a longer delay is that it gives rsync a guaranteed
minimum head start on th
On 11 Jan 2018, at 12:58 (-0500), Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
And not to run GPG if we don't even download anything.
I have not had this issue myself so I all I have is the one example in
the ticket, but the logged bad hash there was for a partial download:
the first 14372 bytes of 1749638.tar.g
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 09:46:24 -0600
David Jones wrote:
> I bet most mirrors have a cron entry like "*/10" ... If we still see
> problems I can extend the delay some more.
But the point of a longer delay is that it gives rsync a guaranteed
minimum head start on the DNS. It doesn't rely on behaviou
On 1/11/2018 12:57 PM, David Jones wrote:
On 01/11/2018 11:24 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 1/11/2018 10:46 AM, David Jones wrote:
There will be a 30 second to a few minutes delay for the DNS updates
to propagate even for DNS caches that don't have the TXT record in
their cache.
I bet mos
On 01/11/2018 11:24 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 1/11/2018 10:46 AM, David Jones wrote:
There will be a 30 second to a few minutes delay for the DNS updates
to propagate even for DNS caches that don't have the TXT record in
their cache.
I bet most mirrors have a cron entry like "*/10" so
On 1/11/2018 10:46 AM, David Jones wrote:
There will be a 30 second to a few minutes delay for the DNS updates
to propagate even for DNS caches that don't have the TXT record in
their cache.
I bet most mirrors have a cron entry like "*/10" so they should pull
the files at 8:40 AM UTC -- a f
On 01/11/2018 09:02 AM, RW wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:06:52 -0600
David Jones wrote:
On 01/10/2018 12:40 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Kevin A. McGrail
wrote:
On 1/10/2018 11:23 AM, David Jones wrote:
I need to see the debug verbose output of one that fails to
t
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:06:52 -0600
David Jones wrote:
> On 01/10/2018 12:40 PM, Alex wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Kevin A. McGrail
> > wrote:
> >> On 1/10/2018 11:23 AM, David Jones wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I need to see the debug verbose output of one that fails to
> >
: util: executable for curl was found at
/usr/bin/curl
Jan 11 04:10:03.395 [7209] dbg: http: /usr/bin/curl -s -L -O
--remote-time -g --max-redirs 2 --connect-timeout 30 --max-time 300
--fail -o 1820847.tar.gz.asc --
http://sa-update.ena.com/1820847.tar.gz.asc
Jan 11 04:10:03.468 [7209] dbg: http: process [
On 01/10/2018 12:40 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Kevin A. McGrail
wrote:
On 1/10/2018 11:23 AM, David Jones wrote:
I need to see the debug verbose output of one that fails to troubleshoot
further.
Agreed. We need someone to run with -D and log it and IDEALLY run
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Kevin A. McGrail
wrote:
> On 1/10/2018 11:23 AM, David Jones wrote:
>>
>> I need to see the debug verbose output of one that fails to troubleshoot
>> further.
>
>
> Agreed. We need someone to run with -D and log it and IDEALLY run a few
> right after to see
On 1/10/2018 11:23 AM, David Jones wrote:
I need to see the debug verbose output of one that fails to
troubleshoot further.
Agreed. We need someone to run with -D and log it and IDEALLY run a few
right after to see if it resolves. I'm guessing one mirror is blocking
or something.
Regard
On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 15:23 +, RW wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 15:10:52 +
> Martin Gregorie wrote:
>
>
> > The update defaults to being run from /etc/cron.weekly/sa-update,
> > which runs /usr/bin/sa-update without any other parameters and does
> > nothing else except for decoding the exi
Hi,
> Update: If the downloads are successful but the GPG verification is
> failing, then this would not be a routing issue.
>
> The rsync'ing by the mirrors should happen quickly and the .sha1 and .asc
> files should sync quickly since they are very small files. If
ccessful but the GPG verification is
failing, then this would not be a routing issue.
The rsync'ing by the mirrors should happen quickly and the .sha1 and
.asc files should sync quickly since they are very small files. If the
downloads are successful by sa-update, then it doesn't make sense
On 01/10/2018 09:23 AM, RW wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 15:10:52 +
Martin Gregorie wrote:
The update defaults to being run from /etc/cron.weekly/sa-update,
which runs /usr/bin/sa-update without any other parameters and does
nothing else except for decoding the exit code and mailing all outpu
Kevin A. McGrail schrieb am 10.01.2018 um 15:09:
>
> Anyone having issues with Sha1 failures on their machines on sa-updates?
>
> Anyone familiar with sa-update.cron so we can try and get more data
on this bug below?
I'm using sa-update.cron from CentoOS 7. Here it failed onc
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 15:10:52 +
Martin Gregorie wrote:
> The update defaults to being run from /etc/cron.weekly/sa-update,
> which runs /usr/bin/sa-update without any other parameters and does
> nothing else except for decoding the exit code and mailing all output
> to root: I think its the st
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 03:10:52PM +, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 09:09 -0500, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> > Anyone having issues with Sha1 failures on their machines on sa-
> > updates?
> >
> No problems are being reported. The log just shows a si
On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 09:09 -0500, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> Anyone having issues with Sha1 failures on their machines on sa-
> updates?
>
No problems are being reported. The log just shows a single 'Update
completed' line for each weekly update.
> Anyone familiar with sa
On 01/10/2018 08:09 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Anyone having issues with Sha1 failures on their machines on sa-updates?
Anyone familiar with sa-update.cron so we can try and get more data on
this bug below?
Generically, cron is going to email the output of the command so adjust
the sa
Anyone having issues with Sha1 failures on their machines on sa-updates?
Anyone familiar with sa-update.cron so we can try and get more data on
this bug below?
Forwarded Message
Subject:[Bug 7331] channel: SHA1 verification failed, channel failed
Date: Tue, 09
Am 21.09.2016 um 23:36 schrieb RW:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 10:54:32 +0200
li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
surely - while DCC ist not a spam sign by it's descriptions
razor/pyzor *are* and they have nothing in common with DNSBL/URIBL
they are *content digest*
Actually razor is pretty close to a URIBL, n
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 10:54:32 +0200
li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
> Am 21.09.2016 um 10:18 schrieb Marcus Schopen:
> > Am Montag, den 19.09.2016, 13:35 +0100 schrieb RW:
> >>>> It's not a spamassassin problem, right. Question is, can I
> >>>> install a SHA1
Am 21.09.2016 um 10:18 schrieb Marcus Schopen:
Am Montag, den 19.09.2016, 13:35 +0100 schrieb RW:
It's not a spamassassin problem, right. Question is, can I install a
SHA1 package without harming perl at other places?
It should do any harm.
That should have been:
It shouldn't d
Am Montag, den 19.09.2016, 13:35 +0100 schrieb RW:
> > It's not a spamassassin problem, right. Question is, can I install a
> > SHA1 package without harming perl at other places?
>
> It should do any harm.
That should have been:
It shouldn't do any harm.
On 21
Hi,
Am Montag, den 19.09.2016, 13:35 +0100 schrieb RW:
> > > It's not a spamassassin problem, right. Question is, can I install a
> > > SHA1 package without harming perl at other places?
> >
> > It should do any harm.
>
> That should have been:
>
o use razor on my private mailbox, but it seems to
> > > > depend on Digest::SHA1, which is not part of Ubuntu 12.04 LTS or
> > > > 14.04 TLS:
> > > >
> > > > The Digest::SHA1 module is required by the Razor2 plugin
> > > >
> > >
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 14:05:34 +0200
Marcus Schopen wrote:
> Am Montag, den 19.09.2016, 11:37 +0200 schrieb li...@rhsoft.net:
> > Am 19.09.2016 um 11:10 schrieb Marcus Schopen:
> > > I'd like to use razor on my private mailbox, but it seems to
> > > depend on Di
Am Montag, den 19.09.2016, 11:37 +0200 schrieb li...@rhsoft.net:
> Am 19.09.2016 um 11:10 schrieb Marcus Schopen:
> > I'd like to use razor on my private mailbox, but it seems to depend on
> > Digest::SHA1, which is not part of Ubuntu 12.04 LTS or 14.04 TLS:
> >
>
Am 19.09.2016 um 11:10 schrieb Marcus Schopen:
I'd like to use razor on my private mailbox, but it seems to depend on
Digest::SHA1, which is not part of Ubuntu 12.04 LTS or 14.04 TLS:
The Digest::SHA1 module is required by the Razor2 plugin
I found this bug report
https://bugs.launchpa
Hi,
I'd like to use razor on my private mailbox, but it seems to depend on
Digest::SHA1, which is not part of Ubuntu 12.04 LTS or 14.04 TLS:
The Digest::SHA1 module is required by the Razor2 plugin
I found this bug report
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libdigest-sha1-perl
Hi Mark,
Thanks very much - you were spot on! I had noticed the file there, but
didn't think it was unusual. But I've now deleted the file (along the the
associated .asc and .sha1 files which were also there), and sa-update now
works again.
Many thanks for your help.
On Wed, Feb 4,
'm running sa-update version svn1475932 (with Perl version 5.18.2) on
a
64-bit Ubuntu 14.04 box.
Running "sa-update -D" shows the following output:
[...]
So the update is not getting the expected sha1 verification. There are
4
mirrors in MIRRORED.BY, and I've tested it wit
30 --max-time 300 --fail -o
1655961.tar.gz.asc -z 1655961.tar.gz.asc --
http://sa-update.space-pro.be/1655961.tar.gz.asc
Feb 4 10:00:44.121 [13904] dbg: http: process [13909], exit status: 0
Feb 4 10:00:44.122 [13904] dbg: sha1: verification wanted:
1d9bedea146ab21a29ccf8c2db69f21f9dada829
Fe
On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 13:04 -0500, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> If you can keep -D on for a few days or weeks and send in
> any errors you get, that would be great.
>
OK
Martin
On 1/18/2013 8:11 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
I edited my cron script (sa_update) to add the -D option to sa-update
and then ran it as "./sa_update 2>&1 | tee sa-diag.txt". File attached.
No update available.
And, of course, this time there was no SHA1 failure: it was obviously
2
> > sa-update version svn917659
> >running on Perl version 5.14.3
> >
> > I'm only using the default rule set.
> > I'm running sa-update without any command line arguments or options.
>
> I run one of the mirrors and I don't show a sha1 mismatch o
running sa-update without any command line arguments or options.
I run one of the mirrors and I don't show a sha1 mismatch on the mirror
cat 1435057.tar.gz.sha1
8eaa92bfceb5160debe78afac819e2a5a31c29c0
/home/updatesd/tmp/stage/3.4.0/update.tgz
sha1sum 1435057.tar.gz
8eaa92bfceb5160debe78afac
What channels do you update and what version of SpamAssassin?
Regards,
KAM
Martin Gregorie wrote:
>Last night [Fri, 18 Jan 2013 04:30:01 + (GMT)] I got:
>
>channel: SHA1 verification failed, channel failed
>Spamassassin rules update failed: error=4
>
>when a cron jo
Last night [Fri, 18 Jan 2013 04:30:01 + (GMT)] I got:
channel: SHA1 verification failed, channel failed
Spamassassin rules update failed: error=4
when a cron job attempted to run sa_update. Has anybody else seen this?
Martin
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 12:55 +0100, Arthur Dent wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 13:21 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > It is selecting a bad mirror. The domain expired recently. :-/
> > As a quick fix, just remove or comment out the bad mirror in all your
> > MIRRORED.BY files. This should do:
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 13:21 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > I only run sa-update once per day and the last two days it has failed
> > with a SHA1 verification error.
>
> > [2208] dbg: channel: reading MIRRORED.BY file
> > [2208] dbg: channel: found mirror
>
> I only run sa-update once per day and the last two days it has failed
> with a SHA1 verification error.
> [2208] dbg: channel: reading MIRRORED.BY file
> [2208] dbg: channel: found mirror
> http://daryl.dostech.ca/sa-update/sare/90_2tld.cf/
> [2208] dbg: channel: fo
Hi,
On Wed, 19.08.2009 at 08:49:22 +0100, Arthur Dent
wrote:
> I only run sa-update once per day and the last two days it has failed
> with a SHA1 verification error.
I just discovered a very similar problem:
# sa-update -D --channelfile /etc/mail/spamassassin/sare-sa-update-channe
Hello all,
I only run sa-update once per day and the last two days it has failed
with a SHA1 verification error.
Here is the debug output: (apologies for the line wrap(s))
...
[2208] dbg: plugin:
Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::MIMEHeader=HASH(0xb0b2c3c) implements
'finish_tests', priori
ules/stage/320790737.tar.gz
>> [13860] dbg: http: GET request,
>> http://yerp.org/rules/stage/320790737.tar.gz.sha1
>> [13860] dbg: http: GET request,
>> http://yerp.org/rules/stage/320790737.tar.gz.asc
>> [13860] dbg: http: IMS GET request, http://yerp.org/rules/stage/MIR
sha1
> [13860] dbg: http: GET request,
> http://yerp.org/rules/stage/320790737.tar.gz.asc
> [13860] dbg: http: IMS GET request, http://yerp.org/rules/stage/MIRRORED.BY,
> Mon, 01 Dec 2008 04:20:22 GMT
> [13860] dbg: sha1: verification wanted: 320790737
> [13860] dbg: sha1: verification
ec 2008 04:20:22 GMT
[13860] dbg: sha1: verification wanted: 320790737
[13860] dbg: sha1: verification result:
a9dbb531b21b74b2cb5b51bca7cd0352493e6a59
channel: SHA1 verification failed, channel failed
[13860] dbg: generic: cleaning up temporary directory/files
[13860] dbg: diag: updates complet
no -- the issue is not the NoMailAudit problem -- it's that
you're missing a required module, Digest::SHA1. read the
INSTALL and UPGRADE docs.
--j.
Bob McClure Jr writes:
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 08:22:05PM -0800, Wen Wang wrote:
>
> > Thanks, Bob. But I don't t
nstalled on
> your system, and still in the PATH.
>
>
>
> - Original Message
> From: Bob McClure Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 9:57:18 PM
> Subject: Re: SA successfully installed, but it doesn&#x
25, 2007 9:57:18 PM
Subject: Re: SA successfully installed, but it doesn't work. Can't locate
Digest/SHA1.pm?
Because /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.7/sun4-solaris is not in
your @INC. But why is
"_/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.7/sun4-solaris_" in your @INC?
Wh
On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 05:14:40PM -0800, Wen Wang wrote:
> The log file says that "can't locate Digest/SHA1.pm", but I do have
> /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.7/sun4-solaris/Digest/SHA1.pm in my
> system. Why?
>
> Following is the log file:
>
> Feb
The log file says that "can't locate Digest/SHA1.pm", but I do have
/usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.7/sun4-solaris/Digest/SHA1.pm in my system.
Why?
Following is the log file:
Feb 25 18:10:38 laika qmail: [ID 748625 mail.info] 1172448638.837731 delivery
126011: suc
On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 10:15:45AM -0400, Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
> # sa-update
> error: can't verify SHA1 signature
> channel: SHA1 verification failed, channel failed
>
> At this point the
> /var/lib/spamassassin/3.001001/updates_spamassassin_org directory was
> e
I upgraded a Solaris 9 system from v3.1.0 to v3.1.1. The upgrade went
fine, but when I attempted to run sa-update, I got the following error:
# sa-update
sa-update: importing default keyring to
'/etc/mail/spamassassin//sa-update-keys'...
error: can't verify SHA1 signatur
Alan Munday wrote:
Lightology Postmaster wrote the following on 08/02/2005 22:07:
RH 9.0 SA 3.02
what is the correct way to install SHA1 on perl 5.8.0, where do I get
it from and how to install it. My sa-learn is stopping at sha1 and I
believe this module may not be installed correctly.
You
Lightology Postmaster wrote the following on 08/02/2005 22:07:
RH 9.0 SA 3.02
what is the correct way to install SHA1 on perl 5.8.0, where do I get it
from and how to install it. My sa-learn is stopping at sha1 and I
believe this module may not be installed correctly.
You can test your
RH 9.0 SA 3.02
what is the correct way to install SHA1 on perl
5.8.0, where do I get it from and how to install it. My sa-learn is stopping at
sha1 and I believe this module may not be installed correctly.
61 matches
Mail list logo
