| Summary: | mail-filter/spamass-milter-0.3.0 ebuild (plus an ebuild to build version from CVS) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Steven Green <steven> |
| Component: | New packages | Assignee: | Gustavo Zacarias (RETIRED) <gustavoz> |
| Status: | RESOLVED TEST-REQUEST | ||
| Severity: | enhancement | CC: | steven |
| Priority: | High | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Attachments: |
mail-filter/spamass-milter upgrade to CVS version
mail-filter/spamass-milter 0.3.0 ebuild |
||
|
Description
Steven Green
2004-07-16 04:07:44 UTC
Created attachment 35539 [details]
mail-filter/spamass-milter upgrade to CVS version
We currently use spamass-milter-0.2.0 on a mail gateway. Every so often we stop receiving mail and get a lot of these lines in our logs: "Milter (spamassassin): error connecting to filter: Connection refused by /var/run/spamass-milter.sock" A fix for this would be nice. There are also several "other" errors that we're attributing to the unstability of this version. What's the likelyhood of getting this ebuild into Portage, at least as a ~keyword? Better update the ebuild to version 0.3.0 just released : http://savannah.nongnu.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=3595 Created attachment 50772 [details]
mail-filter/spamass-milter 0.3.0 ebuild
I have attached an ebuild for 0.3.0. It is the same as the old 0.2.0 ebuild,
but renamed and with the text for the readme changed to us ${PF} instead of
hard coded path.
It seems to be running fine on a machine here (x86), but not had time for any
thorough testing.
I'm taking over the spamass-milter maintainership in gentoo. Ebuild soon, stay tuned. spamass-milter-0.3.0 in portage with KEYWORDS ~x86 ~sparc. Please test and report back, basic testing for me is sane with SA 3.0.2-r1. I'll probably make -r1 in a couple of days with revamped initscripts for dropped privs. I tested 0.3.0 version on amd64. It works fine :) Applied ~amd64 KEYWORDS, thanks for the report. |