On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 02:11:14AM +0530, Ligesh wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 08:44:53PM +0200, Dallman Ross wrote:
I very highly doubt it's a bug in procmail.
To know more, I think it would be good to see the headers of the
message you sent through that didn't do what you expected as
per that log extract you sent. Also, what version of SA and
what is the -a flag?
No it is some form of bug somewhere. I am actually testing
this by piping messages to procmail. The funny thing is,
if I pipe the messages to 'strace -f procmail', instead of
just 'procmail', it works fine, and the mail is delivered
properly. Also, when the spamassassin line is removed, the SAME
mail - the one which did not get detected when there was the
spamassassin rule - gets properly filtered. Maybe I can get the
source of procmail, compile, and run it through idevim and find
out what's happening.
But seeing the behaviour with strace, I think if I run it
through gdb, the bug may not show up. This is one of the most
frustrating kind of bugs; ones that disappear in the presence
of a debugger. It is most likely a timing issue. The wait()
function may not be working properly, and the checks are
happening before spamassassin properly returns or something. I
do not know the architecture of procmail so I cannot comment
more.
Think about what you're saying: you're saying procmail doesn't
work with spamassassin. Well, tens of thousands of uses run
spamassassin from procmail hundreds or thousands of times a day.
Where are these thousands of frustrated users, then, with their
bug reports? SA has been around for four years now. I've been
on this list for eleven, myself. I'm not the oldest user
around here, by any means, either.
Though I don't use SA much at all, I do have it hanging off the end
of my legacy .procmailrc that still runs off the back of my new one.
It has caught three messages in July that my beta self-rolled
spam trap missed. Anyway, I'm running spamd, not SA proper,
but I used to run SA proper as a last resort, and didn't find
any such bug. But many here rely on SA much more than I do,
anyway.
How hard is it to type on your keyboard and pound on the Enter
key every once in a while? We have some great, and helpful,
It is a bit difficult. I write a lot and the actions sort of
come subconsciously. I use the <C-w>, <c-e>, <C-a> f,d,w, e, etc
and make a lot of changes to my message before final posting. If
you add hard newlines, editing the message becomes difficult
Whatever. I'm pretty sure I'm a fair bit older than you, and
I can assure you that I'm grounded in my own set ways as much
as anybody is. That's how humans are, and the older they get, the
more like this they become. But -- and I've mentioned this twice
now today, this marking the third time -- get yourself a copy
of the "par" program. I reformatted this entire posting in
one keystroke. When I edited my paragraphs, I reformatted them,
again with one keystroke. That's how good software's supposed
to work.
You can even write your uninterrupted paragraph-lines as you've
been doing, then, when you're done, hit the macro key and invoke
par. You could even have it automatically happen when you save
your edits! Though one does have to be careful when quoting
procmail recipes, etc.
I can configure vim to do a forced hard newline wrap to files
before it is saved, or I have to try configuring mutt or msmtp
to wrap the lines before mails are sent.
Apparently either one is pretty easy, though.
Dallman
____________________________________________________________
procmail mailing list Procmail homepage: http://www.procmail.org/
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail