It's crashing here, too; while 1.3.3.2 is stable.
I see this line at the end of 1.3.3.3:
Undefined subroutine main::SPFCacheFind called at assp.pl line 4449.
I do not know what happened, I looked into 1.3.3.3 patch I published
on my site, and there is no crashing.
Still having this problem, I was on 1.3.3 and I'm now testing it on
1.3.4(25) and still have this problem, assp is unresponsive periods
of a few minutes too...
But in your log it can be seen that it is ClamAV, which produces the
time out.
Reduces the bytes to be checked.
A much delayed reply!
FYI
Earlier this year F-Prot changed their licensing so that running it on an
email server is
now cost prohibitive. Those of us who were running it are now seeking
other solutions.
Although Grisoft (AVG) offers a mail server edition which costs real money -
but
If SPF is turned off, everything is ok. Otherwise it crashes
at line 4449. The function SPFCacheFind is not defined in this
version.
I have compared the version which i have in use with the version on you
homepage
and it is the same.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
I have compared the version which i have in use with the version on
you
homepage
and it is the same.
Sorry, you are right. I do not know where I looked ((.
Now, there is the correct version
On your hp is still the old version (07.09.2007 23:01) ??
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz
Borgstedt
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:11 AM
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
Subject: Re:
On your hp is still the old version (07.09.2007 23:01) ??
It should read : real stable ))), please look again.
fritz
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://www.magicvillage.de/~Fritz_Borgstedt/assp/S05FD0834.0/ASSP_1.3.3.
3-Patch.zip
Is the same version as it was ... ?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz
Borgstedt
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 11:38 AM
To: Questions and
I have some VIP users that want spam proctection via assp but does not want to
contribute to bayes spam corpus for privacy reasons. Is it possible to omit
saving to spam and notspam for several users. These local users on the other
side wants to use automatic whitelistening for outgoing mail.
Add their email addresses to The Redlist.
--
ME2 (mobile)
-Original Message-
From: Josef Schmitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tuesday, Sep 11, 2007 9:34 am
Subject: [Assp-user] Disallow several users to contribute to spamcorpus
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Questions and Answers
When reporting to the email interface I get -
Undefined subroutine main::matchIP called at bin/assp.pl line 7718.
There are two references to matchIP but I couldn't see it defined anywhere.
-
This SF.net email is sponsored
Josef Schmitz wrote:
I have some VIP users that want spam proctection via assp but does
not want to contribute to bayes spam corpus for privacy reasons. Is
it possible to omit saving to spam and notspam for several users.
These local users on the other side wants to use automatic
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net schreibt:
I have some VIP users that want spam proctection via assp but does
not want to contribute to bayes spam corpus for privacy reasons. Is
it possible to omit saving to spam and notspam for several
When reporting to the email interface I get -
sorry again, i build this release backwards from 1.3.4, so obviously
some parts were overlooked.
please try again.
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all
Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
No, that would be wrong. They want automatic whitelisting.
Ahh, sorry. That bit didnt stick in my brain. I figured it seemed too
obvious!
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all
Yes, indeed, but Real stable build does the job. I
confirm.
Katip
On 11 Sep 2007 at 18:20, Pascal Nobus wrote:
It seems that version 1.3.3.3 crashes when someone is added to the
whitelist by email-interface... This is not so when an emailadress is
added through the webinterface.
Anyone an
I upgraded to 1.3.3.3 because with 1.3.3.1 I got always a CPU of 100%,
and someone posted the same problem here.
Should I copy the email-section from 1.3.3.1 to 1.3.3.3 to fix the problem?
best regards,
Psacal
Katip schreef:
Yes, indeed, but Real stable build does the job. I
confirm.
I'm skipping back to 1.2x
The only problem there is that it hangs when the header is to long (and
the receiver is in the spamlovers)
1.3.3.1 gives 100% CPU
1.3.3.3 crashed on whitelisting by email-interface AND if there is a '
in the emailadres (I know it's not valid, but I received two off them
am i the only one using Debian?
my Debian Sarge 3.1 install seems stable running 1.34(5)
but I tried another Debian 4.1 Lenny running 1.3.3 then 1.34 (25).
The main issues i have are always the Perl packages, specifically CPAN.
Trying to install Compress::Zlib is a nightmare.
the dependencies
1.3.3.3 crashed on whitelisting by email-interface AND if there is a '
in the emailadres (I know it's not valid, but I received two off them
today)
I uploaded 1.3.3.3 this afternoon again. May be you give it a try.
-
On 11 Sep 2007 at 12:42, bytehd wrote:
am i the only one using Debian?
my Debian Sarge 3.1 install seems stable running 1.34(5)
but I tried another Debian 4.1 Lenny running 1.3.3 then 1.34 (25).
The main issues i have are always the Perl packages, specifically CPAN.
Trying to install
am i the only one using Debian?
my Debian Sarge 3.1 install seems stable running 1.34(5)
but I tried another Debian 4.1 Lenny running 1.3.3 then 1.34 (25).
The main issues i have are always the Perl packages, specifically CPAN.
Trying to install Compress::Zlib is a nightmare.
I use sarge
On 11 Sep 2007 at 13:27, bytehd wrote:
1.34 needs it.
Really? Still an option in 'server setup' for me, and if the module is not
present, it
says 'disabled' in the log.
Depending on your link and machine speed loading, you may not see any
difference with
the gui compression anyway.
paul
1.34 needs it
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/
why do i even put up with this place.
explicit instructions as to where in each version of exchange to set the
incoming and outgoing smtp ports.
jeez. never mind.
time to fork this project and get some devs that dont insult everyone
ok ok i will put up print screens somewhere of the perl
?
Who am I insulting and how? If it was something about the wiki - I wanted to
know so I could address/fix it - since I manage it. But your remark was vague
as to which documentation - hense my question.
Also, I happen to know ppl that work for MS that are the tech writers for
Exchange - so
bytehd wrote:
am i the only one using Debian?
my Debian Sarge 3.1 install seems stable running 1.34(5)
but I tried another Debian 4.1 Lenny running 1.3.3 then 1.34 (25).
The main issues i have are always the Perl packages, specifically CPAN.
Trying to install Compress::Zlib is a
William Stucke wrote:
A much delayed reply!
FYI
Earlier this year F-Prot changed their licensing so that running it on an
email server is
now cost prohibitive. Those of us who were running it are now seeking
other solutions.
Although Grisoft (AVG) offers a mail server edition which
bytehd wrote:
but I tried another Debian 4.1 Lenny...
I'll bet Carl feels left out. (simpsons joke for the rest of you)
The main issues i have are always the Perl packages, specifically CPAN.
Trying to install Compress::Zlib is a nightmare.
the dependencies never resolve.
Im left to using
Save yourself some headaches and search for binaries before using CPAN.
why so?s
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Install-Experiences--tf4424840.html#a12627277
Sent from the assp-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
but neither your statement or mine
again...
when I add an email address using the interface, the changes are not saved
to the whitelist file
need more?
P.S.
1.3.4(5) works fine in my other install and its beta too.
more?
--
View this message in context:
Be careful what you wish, you may get it.
Great :)
Ok. I will write from now on only in the
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
32 matches
Mail list logo
