On 10.10.2014 3:35, LuKreme wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 7, 2014, 10:56:54 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> >>>
>> On 07 Oct 2014, at 11:45 , Jari Fredrisson wrote:
>>> > I ran sa-update & sa-compile.
> >>>
>> Should sa-compile be run after sa-update?
> >>>
Of course it should. I assumed && w
On 09 Oct 2014, at 18:35 , LuKreme wrote:
> No, that is not what it says.
>
> $ man 1 bash
> …
> The control operators && and || denote AND lists and OR lists,
> respectively. An AND list has the form
Sorry for duplicating other’s posts, I replied to the original message out of
the “replie
> On 08 Oct 2014, at 16:23 , Duane Hill wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, October 8, 2014, 3:11:06 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>
>>> On 08 Oct 2014, at 04:56 , Duane Hill wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, October 7, 2014, 10:56:54 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>>>
On 07 Oct 2014, at 11:45 , Jari Fredrisson wrote:
> I
On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 18:08 +0700, Olivier Nicole wrote:
> But you don't do a -lint before restarting SA: if an update was to break
> SA (like a big Perl syntax error in a rule, or you are working on a
> plugin on your production system, you feel safe because as long as you
> don't restart spamd, a
Martin,
> I do something similar on my SA rules development system (I also have SA
> installed on this laptop but it is normally not running, which has the
> side effect of disabling the standard Fedora sa-update cron job because
> this won't run sa-update if it can't find the spamd daemon). My mo
On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 11:50 +0700, Olivier Nicole wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > /usr/local/bin/sa-update && /usr/local/bin/sa-compile &&
> > /usr/local/etc/rc.d/sa-spamd restart
> >
> > the only time spamd would restart is if sa-update AND sa-compile were
> > successfully completed, correct?
>
Yes, tha
Hi,
> /usr/local/bin/sa-update && /usr/local/bin/sa-compile &&
> /usr/local/etc/rc.d/sa-spamd restart
>
> the only time spamd would restart is if sa-update AND sa-compile were
> successfully completed, correct?
Sorry for jumping in the conversation... I have solved that issue by
calling sa-u
On Wednesday, October 8, 2014, 6:31:08 PM, Martin confabulated:
> On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 16:46 -0600, Amir Caspi wrote:
>> On Oct 8, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Duane Hill wrote:
>> >
>> > No. && is a way of chaining commands together. Your cron says run
>> > sa-update and then restart spamd. In
On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 16:46 -0600, Amir Caspi wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Duane Hill wrote:
> >
> > No. && is a way of chaining commands together. Your cron says run
> > sa-update and then restart spamd. In other words, when sa-update
> > finishes running, regardless if t
Looks like I'm late to the party. :-)
--- Amir
thumbed via iPhone
> On Oct 8, 2014, at 4:46 PM, Amir Caspi wrote:
>
>> On Oct 8, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Duane Hill wrote:
>>
>> No. && is a way of chaining commands together. Your cron says run
>> sa-update and then restart spamd. In othe
On Wednesday, October 8, 2014, 5:38:20 PM, John wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014, Duane Hill wrote:
>> No. && is a way of chaining commands together.
> ...where the second command is only executed if the first command exited
> with a zero status. && stops on failure.
> try:
> true && echo "wa
On Oct 8, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Duane Hill wrote:
>
> No. && is a way of chaining commands together. Your cron says run
> sa-update and then restart spamd. In other words, when sa-update
> finishes running, regardless if there was an update applied or not,
> restart spamd.
Unless I
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 17:23:36 -0500
Duane Hill wrote:
> No. && is a way of chaining commands together.
&& is a logical AND
> Your cron says run
> sa-update and then restart spamd. In other words, when sa-update
> finishes running, regardless if there was an update applied or not,
>
On Wednesday, October 8, 2014, 5:31:07 PM, Dave wrote:
> On 2014-10-08 15:23, Duane Hill wrote:
>> No. && is a way of chaining commands together. Your cron says run
>> sa-update and then restart spamd. In other words, when sa-update
>> finishes running, regardless if there was an up
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014, Duane Hill wrote:
No. && is a way of chaining commands together.
...where the second command is only executed if the first command exited
with a zero status. && stops on failure.
try:
true && echo "was true"
false && echo "was false"
If you want it to execute t
On 2014-10-08 15:23, Duane Hill wrote:
No. && is a way of chaining commands together. Your cron says run
sa-update and then restart spamd. In other words, when sa-update
finishes running, regardless if there was an update applied or not,
restart spamd.
I thought that ; would chain
On Wednesday, October 8, 2014, 3:11:06 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>> On 08 Oct 2014, at 04:56 , Duane Hill wrote:
>>
>> On Tuesday, October 7, 2014, 10:56:54 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>>
>>> On 07 Oct 2014, at 11:45 , Jari Fredrisson wrote:
I ran sa-update & sa-compile.
>>
>>> Should sa-compile be run
> On 08 Oct 2014, at 04:56 , Duane Hill wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, October 7, 2014, 10:56:54 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>
>> On 07 Oct 2014, at 11:45 , Jari Fredrisson wrote:
>>> I ran sa-update & sa-compile.
>
>> Should sa-compile be run after sa-update?
>
>> I have a crontab entry:
>
>> 16 1 * *
On October 8, 2014 5:56:54 AM LuKreme wrote:
16 1 * * * /usr/local/bin/sa-update && /usr/local/etc/rc.d/sa-spamd
restart
should I add an sa-compile call?
If the plugin for precompiled body rules is enabled yes, check plugins in
pre file
On Tue, 7 Oct 2014 21:56:54 -0600
LuKreme wrote:
> On 07 Oct 2014, at 11:45 , Jari Fredrisson wrote:
> > I ran sa-update & sa-compile.
>
> Should sa-compile be run after sa-update?
>
> I have a crontab entry:
>
> 16 1 * * * /usr/local/bin/sa-update
> && /usr/local/etc/rc.d/sa-spamd restar
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014, 10:56:54 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 07 Oct 2014, at 11:45 , Jari Fredrisson wrote:
>> I ran sa-update & sa-compile.
> Should sa-compile be run after sa-update?
> I have a crontab entry:
> 16 1 * * * /usr/local/bin/sa-update &&
> /usr/local/etc/rc.d/sa-spamd resta
On 07 Oct 2014, at 11:45 , Jari Fredrisson wrote:
> I ran sa-update & sa-compile.
Should sa-compile be run after sa-update?
I have a crontab entry:
16 1 * * * /usr/local/bin/sa-update && /usr/local/etc/rc.d/sa-spamd restart
should I add an sa-compile call?
--
'It's still a lie. Like the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7.10.2014 20:38, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 07.10.2014 um 19:34 schrieb Jari Fredrisson:
>> On 7.10.2014 20:29, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2014-10-07 at 18:55 +0300, Jari Fredrisson wrote:
I built SA 3.4 using cpan to my old Debi
Am 07.10.2014 um 19:34 schrieb Jari Fredrisson:
On 7.10.2014 20:29, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Tue, 2014-10-07 at 18:55 +0300, Jari Fredrisson wrote:
I built SA 3.4 using cpan to my old Debian Squeeze-lts.
root@hurricane:~# time service spamassassin start
Starting SpamAssassin Mail Filter
On 7.10.2014 20:29, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-10-07 at 18:55 +0300, Jari Fredrisson wrote:
>> I built SA 3.4 using cpan to my old Debian Squeeze-lts.
>>
>> root@hurricane:~# time service spamassassin start
>> Starting SpamAssassin Mail Filter Daemon: child process [4868] exited or
>
On Tue, 2014-10-07 at 18:55 +0300, Jari Fredrisson wrote:
> I built SA 3.4 using cpan to my old Debian Squeeze-lts.
>
> root@hurricane:~# time service spamassassin start
> Starting SpamAssassin Mail Filter Daemon: child process [4868] exited or
> timed out without signaling production of a PID fil
On 7.10.2014 18:58, Axb wrote:
> On 10/07/2014 05:55 PM, Jari Fredrisson wrote:
>> I built SA 3.4 using cpan to my old Debian Squeeze-lts.
>>
>> root@hurricane:~# time service spamassassin start
>> Starting SpamAssassin Mail Filter Daemon: child process [4868] exited or
>> timed out without signali
On 10/07/2014 05:55 PM, Jari Fredrisson wrote:
I built SA 3.4 using cpan to my old Debian Squeeze-lts.
root@hurricane:~# time service spamassassin start
Starting SpamAssassin Mail Filter Daemon: child process [4868] exited or
timed out without signaling production of a PID file: exit 255 at
/usr
I built SA 3.4 using cpan to my old Debian Squeeze-lts.
root@hurricane:~# time service spamassassin start
Starting SpamAssassin Mail Filter Daemon: child process [4868] exited or
timed out without signaling production of a PID file: exit 255 at
/usr/local/bin/spamd line 2960.
real0m1.230s
use
ctually was a problem with Time::HiRes and Net::DNS)
>
> <>
>
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: xoops?? [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 1:00 AM
> > To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> > Subject
(actually was a problem with Time::HiRes and Net::DNS)
<>
> -Original Message-
> From: xoops?? [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 1:00 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: spamd does not start
>
> Hi,
&g
jdow wrote:
(B> From: "alan premselaar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(B> To: "xoops$B
(B> Cc:
(B> Sent: 2004 December, 02, Thursday 23:27
(B> Subject: Re: spamd does not start
(B>
(B>
(B>
(B>>xoops$B>
(B>>>Hi,
(B>>>
My IO::Socket version is 1.26 which is up to date, CPAN says.
Alan, is my font readable in your screen ?
Thanks.
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have newly installed spamassassin-3.0.1 into linux box 2.4.18-22 running
> > qmail with qmail-queue patch.
> > Having a trouble to start spamd with SPAMDOPTIONS="-
From: "alan premselaar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(BTo: "xoops$B
(BCc:
(BSent: 2004 December, 02, Thursday 23:27
(BSubject: Re: spamd does not start
(B
(B
(B> xoops$B > Hi,
(B> >
(B> > I have newly installed spamassassin-3.0.1 into linux box 2.4.18-22
xoops$B Hi,
(B>
(B> I have newly installed spamassassin-3.0.1 into linux box 2.4.18-22 running
(B> qmail with qmail-queue patch.
(B> Having a trouble to start spamd with SPAMDOPTIONS="-x -u spamd -H /home/spamd
(B> -d":
(B>
(B> "Starting spamd: Bareword "SO_REUSEPORT" not allowed while
Hi,
(B
(BI have newly installed spamassassin-3.0.1 into linux box 2.4.18-22 running
(Bqmail with qmail-queue patch.
(BHaving a trouble to start spamd with SPAMDOPTIONS="-x -u spamd -H /home/spamd
(B-d":
(B
(B "Starting spamd: Bareword "SO_REUSEPORT" not allowed while "strict subs" in
(Bu
36 matches
Mail list logo