http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5751
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-12-18 08:40 ------- (In reply to comment #5) > Then, sa-update will happily create the /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002003 > directory > (using Fedora locations) and populate it with the rules from the channel with > the valid gpg key while warning of a bad gpg key and failing to add the base > ruleset for updates.spamassassin.org. The non-expert user likely won't > see/understand/recognize the warning and will be left with a spamassassin > configuration without any valid base rules since once the > /var/lib/spamassassin/3.002003 directory is created, it overrides the other > locations for the original non-updated rules (e.g., /usr/share/spamassassin) Yes, of course. That's how sa-update is supposed to work. updates.spamassassin.org isn't a required channel, nor should it be (there are use cases where people want to just use their own channels, for instance). I also don't think that the whole update should fail if any of the channels fail. http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RuleUpdates has this covered as the very top item in the FAQ section, btw. For most people, if they're adding in a third party channel, they'll need to pay attention to the fact that they need the project's channel to install as well to get those rules. IMO, this would be addressed by us not including any rules w/ the standard distro and requiring all rules to come from the update system. It also fixes our issue whereby we have multiple areas for rules for the same SA version (ie: rules/branches/3.2 and branches/3.2/rules ...) ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
