On Tuesday 24 July 2007, David Baron wrote: >> >> Humm, with my lashup here that Joanne helped me setup, S78spamassassin >> >> starts a few copies of spamd, and fetchmail is started much later in >> >> S99local. Its fetchmail that calls procmail, and its procmail that >> >> calls the spamd's, so there is no time that SA can be bypassed. >> >> >> >> I thought everyone was doing it. Somebodies better idea isn't? >> > >> >Problem is that the S78 will start spamassassin but that start does not >> >necessarily get a valid rule-set. For that, the internet connection must >> > be up at the time. >> >> And why would it not be when the network start is S10network? > >I have: >/etc/rc0.d/S35networking >/etc/rc2.d/S99networking >/etc/rc3.d/S99networking >/etc/rc5.d/S99networking >/etc/rc6.d/S35networking >/etc/rcS.d/S40networking > >S99 is what is being hit. > And I would call ANY distro that starts networking in the S99files terminally broken. Rename that link so it starts earlier than that. Earlier and earlier till it complains about something it needs. Then go rename that one too.
>This is Debian box originally set up from a Knoppix hd installation. I have >not fiddled with any of these. I assume there is decent reason for the >numbering schemes for these scripts. > >The network connection is not immediate. Often must poll several times > before it gets logged in. I saw this with repeated attempts by ntpdate to > get its connection. I currently try five times with 15 second waits. > Sometimes hits the first time, sometimes needs a few tries. > >>> Problem is that the S78 will start spamassassin but that start does not >>> necessarily get a valid rule-set. >> >>This is the bit puzzling me: Why must sa-update complete sucessfully >>for spamd to start? The default SA rules should be shipped in the >>package, and be placed in (typically) /usr/share/spamassassin; rules >>from sa-update will be placed somewhere like /var/lib/spamassassin (by >>default), and the SA rule-loading code will check both locations. I wonder about that too, as the spamassassin startup make no reference to sa-update here. Its assumed (theres that word again) that you have set that function up in a crontab rule, to refresh it about weekly if required. Sigh, somebody, please take another look at this mousetrap, its a very poorly designed version. >>Where do you get your SA package from? It sounds like the package >>maintainer may need to learn a bit more about how SA works for the next >>package release... > >This is from Debian "Sid" which I assume is legit enough. I discovered that > if sa_update failed, spam was getting through which was why I set it up as > I did. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) "Being disintegrated makes me ve-ry an-gry!" <huff, huff>
