Hi Jonathan,
Jonathan Hankins schrieb:
> Package: mimedefang
> Version: 2.48-1
> Severity: normal
>
> In changelog.gz, a while back, it reads:
>
> 2004-07-15 David F. Skoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Move /etc/mail/spamassassin/sa-mimedefang.cf to
> /etc/mail/sa-mimedefang.cf *** NOTE INCOMPATIBILITY ***
>
> However, if you look at /usr/bin/mimedefang.pl, it is looks for the
> user_prefs file like this:
>
> --
>
> if (!defined($config)) {
> if (-r "/etc/sa-mimedefang.cf") {
> $config = "/etc/sa-mimedefang.cf";
> } elsif (-r "/etc/spamassassin/sa-mimedefang.cf") {
> $config = "/etc/spamassassin/sa-mimedefang.cf";
> } elsif (-r "/etc/spamassassin/local.cf") {
> $config = "/etc/spamassassin/local.cf";
> } else {
> $config = "/etc/spamassassin.cf";
> }
> }
>
> --
>
> This way, it never finds sa-mimedefang.cf.
>
> If you change debian/rules configure command to specify
> "--with-confsubdir=mail" (2 locations, one commented out) then it finds it. I
> don't know if this is the best way to fix this, however.
Thanks for the bug report. Just yesterday I found this bug myself. I was
wondering why the settings were not used. The patch in mimedefang.pl got
lost between versions 2.43 and 2.44.
> I am a bit confused about which rules files spamassassin uses when run from
> mimedefang anyway. Doesn't SpamAssassin find /etc/spamassassin/local.cf
> anyway? If so, why does mimedefang.pl also specify it as userprefs_filename
> (in the case where sa-mimedefang.cf is not present above)?
spamc and mimedefang are both perl programs which use the spamassassin
perl packages. Every program specifies which preferences file to use.
spamc uses local.cf, mimedefang.pl uses normaly sa-mimedefang.pl.
> Is there a difference between "rules" files and "user prefs" files?
I am not sure.
> Also, the man page for Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf mentions that some items are
> privileged and cannot appear in the user prefs file. I am assuming that when
> mimedefang.pl calls Mail::SpamAssassin->new() with userprefs_filename =
> "/etc/mail/sa-mimedefang.cf" (or whatever) that this file cannot contain
> "privileged" items? Is this a problem?
I think, this is correct. What "privileged" items do you want to use here?
Christoph
--
============================================================================
Christoph Martin, EDV der Verwaltung, Uni-Mainz, Germany
Internet-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Telefon: +49-6131-3926337
Fax: +49-6131-3922856
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
