On Fri, 2014-08-29 at 02:15 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
> look at the attached zp-archive and both messages
> produced with the same content before you pretend
> others lying damned - to make it easier i even
> added a config-diff
But no message diff. ;)
> and now what?
>
> maybe you should accept that even new users are
> no idiots and know what they are talking about
Please accept my apologies. It appears something else is going on here,
and you in fact did not lie.
I'd like to add, though, that I do *not* assume new users to be idiots.
Plus, I generally spend quite some time on helping others fixing their
problems, including new users, as you certainly have noticed.
Now, moving forward: I've had a look at the message diffs. Quite
interesting, and I honestly want to figure out what's happening.
First of all, minus all those different datetime strings, IDs and
ordering, the real differences are
-Subject: [SPAM] Test^M
-X-Spam-Flag: Yes^M
+Subject: Test^M
So it appears that only the sample with add_header spam Flag has the
Subject re-written.
However, there's something else going on. When re-writing the Subject
header, SA adds an X-Spam-Prev-Subject header with the original. Which
is clearly missing.
Thus, something else has a severe impact on which headers are added or
modified. In *both* cases, there is at least one SA generated header
missing and/or SA modified header not preserved.
Definitely involved: Postfix, spamass-milter, SA. And probably some
other tool rewriting the message / reflowing headers, as per some
previous posts (and the X-Spam-Report header majorly inconvenienced by
re-flowing headers).
Regarding SA and the features in question: There is no different
behavior between calling the plain spamassassin script and using
spamc/d. There is absolutely nothing in SA itself that could explain the
discrepancy in Subject rewriting, nor the missing X-Spam-Prev-Subject
header.
My best bet would be on the SA invoking glue, not accepting or
overwriting headers as received by SA. Which tool that actually is, I
don't know. But I'd be interested to hear about it, if you find out.
(The additional empty line between message headers and body in the case
without X-Spam-Flag header most likely is just copy-n-paste body. Or
possibly another artifact of some tool munging messages.)
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu\0.@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
