Wow... This mail has been sitting in my draft folder for a while, so I
figured I ought to get it out.
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 12:24:04PM -0400, Chris Santerre wrote:
> I got nothing but love for you, so here goes ;) ..
:)
> > Chris! I'm surprised to hear you spreading this misinformation.
On Wed, August 16, 2006 22:16, Bill Landry wrote:
> Michaelangelo, Raphael, Leonardo, Donatello and Chris :-p
room for extensions :-)
> PS, Andy, can you make your font any smaller, it's just not quite magnifing
> glass size yet...
or stop posting html to mailling lists :-)
--
Benny
Bill Landry wrote:
- Original Message - From: Andy Jezierski
There's a bunch of people in SARE (I don't know the actual number)
focused on developing rules.
Agreed. That's all they do is rules. Who knows how many ninja's are
out there.
Well, from what I recall, from when my kid
- Original Message -
From: Andy Jezierski
There's a bunch of people in SARE (I don't know the actual number)
focused on developing rules.
Agreed. That's all they do is rules. Who knows how many ninja's are out
there.
Well, from what I recall, from when my kids were much younger
Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
on 08/16/2006 10:04:19 AM:
> I was debating whether or not to get involved with this thread, and
it
> looks like the original issue that Richard was concerned about has
been
> addressed so that's good. However, my other issue with the thread
so
> far co
Title: RE: breaking out: thinking abt the 'sa-update *VS* rdj' thread .. .
*sigh*
I fear my last reply may either
1) Drive a wedge between SA and SARE
2) Make ppl think SARE vs SA is the norm.
I assure everyone that SA and SARE have helped eachother a TON. Many of our request
Title: RE: breaking out: thinking abt the 'sa-update *VS* rdj' thread .. .
I got nothing but love for you, so here goes ;) ..
These are MY OPINIONS, and may or may not represent the opinions of SARE as a whole.
> -Original Message-
> From: Theo Van Dinte
I was debating whether or not to get involved with this thread, and it
looks like the original issue that Richard was concerned about has been
addressed so that's good. However, my other issue with the thread so
far comes from the misleading or otherwise incorrect information being
presented which
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 06:27:59PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Gah! I just found that sha1sum.pl is in MANIFEST.SKIP for some reason.
> WTF?
FWIW, I just put build/md5sum.pl and build/sha1sum.pl back in MANIFEST so
they'll be included in the tarball for 3.1.5 and beyond. :)
--
Randomly G
Chris Santerre wrote:
and, the OTHER project in this discussion -- SARE -- leaning
on your own
argument, is pointedly NOT undertaking to use/conform to sa's
'official' tools & capabilities -- namely, sa-update as a delivery
mechanism.
I don't see how I can make this any clearer
SARE is r
Chris Santerre wrote:
We write rules, not delivery systems. You can print out the rulesets
from our webpage, and retype them into your system if you like. You can
have someone encrypt ROT13, RAR, ZIP, and send you the torrent link. How
you get your rules is your choice.
It looks like SARE r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
oops.
s/i did not say "SARE is rules"./i did not say "SARE is delivery"./
On 8/11/06 Richard wrote:
> i did not say "SARE is rules".
- --
/"\
\ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
X against HTML email, vCards
/ \ & micro$oft attachments
[GPG] OpenM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Chris Santerre wrote, On 8/11/06 11:51 AM:
>> and, the OTHER project in this discussion -- SARE -- leaning
>> on your own
>> argument, is pointedly NOT undertaking to use/conform to sa's
>> 'official' tools & capabilities -- namely, sa-update as
Title: RE: breaking out: thinking abt the 'sa-update *VS* rdj' thread ...
> and, the OTHER project in this discussion -- SARE -- leaning
> on your own
> argument, is pointedly NOT undertaking to use/conform to sa's
> 'official' tools & capabi
jdow writes:
> From: "Justin Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Panagiotis Christias writes:
> >> On 8/11/06, DAve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > DAve wrote:
> >> > > Panagiotis Christias wrote:
> >> > >> On 8/11/06, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > >>> FWIW, the format sa-update e
From: "Justin Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Panagiotis Christias writes:
On 8/11/06, DAve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> DAve wrote:
> > Panagiotis Christias wrote:
> >> On 8/11/06, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> FWIW, the format sa-update expects is the standard format from sha1su
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
hi andy,
> Breaking out flamethrower. :-)
heh.
> The official SA rules are meant to be used by all users. SARE on the
> other hand is "Here's the rules we have, go ahead and pick and choose what
> you'd like to use. If anything"
true.
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/11/2006
11:11:00 AM:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> hi,
>
> < ... adjusting tin-foil hat and asbestos shorts ...>
>
Breaking out flamethrower. :-)
> a recent thread comment "from SARE"
is the trigger here:
>
> "RDJ
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
hi bret,
> Amen.
well, that, at least, makes two of us ;-)
...
> Keeping the environment simpler and similar tasks done in a consistent
> manner is really essential in a lot of business environments.
100% agreed. and re: "the environment",
> < ... adjusting tin-foil hat and asbestos shorts ...>
>
> since i actually asked a simple question early on (~ "can we use
> sa-update rather than RDJ to pull SARE rules ...") in the interminable
> "SA vs RDJ" thread ;-) , and, afaict, it's still unanswered,
> i'll "opine".
>
> a recent thread c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
hi chris,
Chris Santerre wrote, On 8/11/06 9:26 AM:
>> from a user's perspective, all this is confusing/confounding. as a
>> user, i want to see/use one mechanism for rules.
>
> From an SA admin, it makes perfect sense. :)
well, given that i'm
Title: RE: breaking out: thinking abt the 'sa-update *VS* rdj' thread ...
> from a user's perspective, all this is confusing/confounding. as a
> user, i want to see/use one mechanism for rules.
From an SA admin, it makes perfect sense. :)
>
> currently, it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
hi,
< ... adjusting tin-foil hat and asbestos shorts ...>
since i actually asked a simple question early on (~ "can we use
sa-update rather than RDJ to pull SARE rules ...") in the interminable
"SA vs RDJ" thread ;-) , and, afaict, it's still un
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 11:42:57AM -0400, Chris Santerre wrote:
If the SARE guys are interested in this project, maybe they could come
up with a list of the most commonly downloaded rulesets.
For the month of Aug to date
1 /rules/70_sare_random.cf
2 /rule
Title: RE: sa-update vs RDJ
> -Original Message-
> From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 11:45 AM
> To: Chris Santerre
> Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: sa-update vs RDJ
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 1
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 11:42:57AM -0400, Chris Santerre wrote:
> > If the SARE guys are interested in this project, maybe they could come
> > up with a list of the most commonly downloaded rulesets.
>
> For the month of Aug to date
>
> 1 /rules/70_sare_random.cf
> 2 /rules/70_sare_ad
Title: RE: sa-update vs RDJ
>
> If the SARE guys are interested in this project, maybe they could come
> up with a list of the most commonly downloaded rulesets.
For the month of Aug to date
1 /rules/70_sare_random.cf
2 /rules/70_sare_adult.cf
3
Title: RE: sa-update vs RDJ
>> If the SARE guys are interested in this project, maybe they could come
>> up with a list of the most commonly downloaded rulesets.
>They are oddly silent on the subject so far...
We're listening :)
RDJ and SAupdate are reall
> >> Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>
> >> Going further...
> >>
> >> I could see SARE rules offered on many channels though some
> >> reorganization may be required. Channels such as post25,
> >> pre30, header,
> >> body, etc. There are too many rules to have a channel for each but
> >> possibly sets of
Bowie Bailey wrote:
DAve wrote:
I have it working fine here, about 20 lines of /bin/sh and and I can
turn out any number of rule sets, even a channel per SARE rule.
I'm willing to publish the channels if there is interest in them. I
still believe packages or sets of popular rules would be good.
DAve wrote:
>
> I have it working fine here, about 20 lines of /bin/sh and and I can
> turn out any number of rule sets, even a channel per SARE rule.
>
> I'm willing to publish the channels if there is interest in them. I
> still believe packages or sets of popular rules would be good.
> Alterna
Bret Miller wrote:
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
Going further...
I could see SARE rules offered on many channels though some
reorganization may be required. Channels such as post25,
pre30, header,
body, etc. There are too many rules to have a channel for each but
possibly sets of popular rules
Bill Randle wrote:
On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 22:35 -0400, DAve wrote:
DAve wrote:
Panagiotis Christias wrote:
On 8/11/06, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
FWIW, the format sa-update expects is the standard format from sha1sum.
Does FreeBSD have a sha1sum that produces the format that yo
Panagiotis Christias writes:
> On 8/11/06, DAve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > DAve wrote:
> > > Panagiotis Christias wrote:
> > >> On 8/11/06, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>> FWIW, the format sa-update expects is the standard format from sha1sum.
> > >>> Does FreeBSD have a sha
On 8/11/06, DAve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DAve wrote:
> Panagiotis Christias wrote:
>> On 8/11/06, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> FWIW, the format sa-update expects is the standard format from sha1sum.
>>> Does FreeBSD have a sha1sum that produces the format that you showed?
>>>
On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 22:35 -0400, DAve wrote:
> DAve wrote:
> > Panagiotis Christias wrote:
> >> On 8/11/06, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> FWIW, the format sa-update expects is the standard format from sha1sum.
> >>> Does FreeBSD have a sha1sum that produces the format that you
DAve wrote:
Panagiotis Christias wrote:
On 8/11/06, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
FWIW, the format sa-update expects is the standard format from sha1sum.
Does FreeBSD have a sha1sum that produces the format that you showed?
Answering my own question, FreeBSD seems to not have a "s
Panagiotis Christias wrote:
On 8/11/06, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
FWIW, the format sa-update expects is the standard format from sha1sum.
Does FreeBSD have a sha1sum that produces the format that you showed?
Answering my own question, FreeBSD seems to not have a "sha1sum",
but
On 8/11/06, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
FWIW, the format sa-update expects is the standard format from sha1sum.
Does FreeBSD have a sha1sum that produces the format that you showed?
Answering my own question, FreeBSD seems to not have a "sha1sum",
but has a "sha1" which has that k
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Randomly Generated Tagline:
> "... specially formulated so more nutrition stays in your cat." - Iams
IAMS doesn't seem to be barfed with any less frequency than any other
cat food brand we've tried, so they're obviously not using an
anti-emetic ingred
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 06:03:23PM -0400, DAve wrote:
> >For now, you may want to either do the openssl redirect thing, or use
> >build/sha1sum.pl from the tarball. Both produce the expected format.
>
> Hmm my 3.1.1 doesn't have sha1sum.pl in build, contrib, or tools. But
> how hard can a wrappe
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 05:12:48PM -0400, DAve wrote:
SpamAssassin sha1 contents (would all be one line) have the signature first,
f7c3edde6e9e2330318c3fc6a8e70af68387eaeb
/home/updatesd/tmp/stage/3.2.0/update.tgzSHA1
My sha1 contents (would all be one line) have the si
DAve wrote:
I ran into one issue but I haven't gotten a chance to look deeper into
it yet. The sha1 file on updates.spamassassin.org is in one format, and
he sha1 file I create is in another. Currently sa-update can't parse my
file so I had to edit it.
SpamAssassin sha1 contents (would all b
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 05:12:48PM -0400, DAve wrote:
> SpamAssassin sha1 contents (would all be one line) have the signature first,
> f7c3edde6e9e2330318c3fc6a8e70af68387eaeb
> /home/updatesd/tmp/stage/3.2.0/update.tgzSHA1
>
> My sha1 contents (would all be one line) have the signature last,
> (
Bret Miller wrote:
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 09:58:19AM -0700, Richard wrote:
>>> rules_du_jour was done when sa-update did not exists
>> are you implying that sa-update replaces rules-du-jour?
>
> That depends on what you mean by "replaces".
>
>> i though sa-update
Bret Miller wrote:
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 09:58:19AM -0700, Richard wrote:
>>> rules_du_jour was done when sa-update did not exists
>> are you implying that sa-update replaces rules-du-jour?
>
> That depends on what you mean by "replaces".
>
>> i though sa-update
> Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 09:58:19AM -0700, Richard wrote:
> >>> rules_du_jour was done when sa-update did not exists
> >> are you implying that sa-update replaces rules-du-jour?
> >
> > That depends on what you mean by "replaces".
> >
> >> i though sa-update updat
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 09:58:19AM -0700, Richard wrote:
>>> rules_du_jour was done when sa-update did not exists
>> are you implying that sa-update replaces rules-du-jour?
>
> That depends on what you mean by "replaces".
>
>> i though sa-update updates the SA distro's bun
On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 06:06:02PM -0700, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> Was there an update available on May 8?
There've been updates available for a while now. Since before 3.1.1
came out, which was at the start of March.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"I didn't know Allman was a stand-up comedian ..
On 5/13/06, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's not empty if the download is successful. I believe there's a ticket
about changing the behavior so an empty directory isn't left behind if the
first attempt to do an update fails.
Sounds good.
> In that case I would argue that eithe
On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 04:27:14PM -0700, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> But surely there's some kind of disconnect here. sa-update creates an
> empty directory that spamassassin (and spamd) then uses preferentially
> to the one that really has the rules in it.
It's not empty if the download is successfu
On 5/13/06, Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 10:57:11AM -0700, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> Well, guess what. "sa-update" creates the
> /var/lib/spamassassin/3.001001 directory if it does not exist, rather
> than finding the directory that does exist and using that.
On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 10:57:11AM -0700, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> Apparently the conflict is only that RDJ restarts spamd automatically,
> but sa-update does not.
I don't believe there's a conflict there, but yes, sa-update does not
auto-restart spamd.
> Default configuration data is loaded
On 5/13/06, Bart Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think there's some kind of conflict between sa-update and
RulesDuJour that has borked my spamassassin installation, but I can't
figure out how.
Apparently the conflict is only that RDJ restarts spamd automatically,
but sa-update does not.
I think there's some kind of conflict between sa-update and
RulesDuJour that has borked my spamassassin installation, but I can't
figure out how.
This morning after RDJ restarted spamd, spamc started returning
messages with ONLY the spamassassin version header added, not the
score report. Runnin
55 matches
Mail list logo
