On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:07, Warren Togami<[email protected]> wrote: > On 07/07/2009 04:57 AM, Justin Mason wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 23:36, Warren Togami<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 07/06/2009 06:12 PM, Justin Mason wrote: >>>> >>>> crap, you're right. :( >>>> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6147 >>>> >>>> there's a patch there that appears to fix it. does it work for you? >>>> >>>> --j. >>> >>> A patch only for MANIFEST* going to copy *.pre files from the tarball, >>> when >>> the tarball lacks those files? >>> >>> It seems MANIFEST* only effects what goes from the SCM into tarball. >> >> yep, you'd have to rebuild the tarball. >> >>> Anyhow, I'm adding the *.pre files manually for the initial package. >> >> ok > > But now I'm unable to push this packaged due to the tainting issue. Is this > is in fact a perl bug, not spamassassin's fault? This is the latest version > of upstream perl.
I haven't looked into it, but iirc, it's a perl bug. (at least a bug in a module bundled with perl.) We trigger it due to our extensive use of -T (taint mode). As Mark notes, we may be able to work around it in our code though. --j.
