I have thought about Docker too. And on some level it is very appealing. Some 
kind of virtualization would obviate much of the pain that is porting 
SpamAssassin to Windows.

But we (here at JAM) are not doing this for ourselves. We are doing this for 
our customers. We would have to tell them that they need to install Docker. Or 
we would have to bundle it with our products, which would make the packages 
huge. And if they wanted to make any change, like loading a custom plugin, they 
would have to know how Docker and Unix work. And it would be hard to integrate 
with the rest of our products. So, making SpamAssassin truly portable is still 
the way to go for us.

Btw, no danger of starting an OS war. I prefer Unix … and vim. Let the editor 
war begin. ;-)

Von: Per-Erik Persson [mailto:[email protected]]
Gesendet: Montag, 26. Oktober 2015 10:13
An: [email protected]
Betreff: Re: Build-time vs run-time configuration of paths

Without creating to much of an OS war here I think it would be quite easy to 
run spamassassin inside a docker container on windows, thus eliminating a lot 
of problems.
Perhaps this is the the way to go?
Den 2015-10-22 kl. 03:30, skrev Kevin A. McGrail:
My opinion is to add the support for Windows so I don't foresee a gigantic 
hurdle. Bang out whichever way works best for you because I don't want to stand 
in the way of progress.

But yes, a -f and an is running windows logic check that then reads a site 
config file sounds sane and unlikely to impact things too badly. I don't see 
the need for a config option but if it's needed I would support that too.
Regards,
KAM
On October 21, 2015 1:48:31 AM PDT, Martin Puppe 
<[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> wrote:

Here is where I am coming from. I am trying to minimize the number of custom 
patches we have to apply before building SpamAssassin for Windows. That 
benefits us because we do not have to merge when SpamAssassin gets updates. And 
it benefits anyone else who is trying to run SpamAssassin on Windows.



That said, on Windows systems, preparing a Perl application for distribution is 
unfortunately not as straight-forward as on Unix systems. While the filesystem 
layout is standardized for Unix systems (at least for all systems running a 
given distribution), it is not at all for Windows systems. So, a distributor on 
a Unix system can simply set some of the variables described in PACKAGING when 
he or she runs `perl Makefile.PL`. Unfortunately, that does not work on Windows.



Currently, we are patching the various SpamAssassin scripts (sa-update, 
spamassassin, spamd, etc.) so that they all read a `./path.config` file at 
runtime. That is obviously

  not

very Unix-y. So, it might not be a great idea to merge this into upstream, even 
behind `am_running_on_windows()`. (Or is it?)



I do not have any specific proposal at the moment. (A `--siteconfigpath` option 
for sa-udpate would probably go a long way though). I am just trying to raise 
awareness and solicit some opinions on the matter.



Regards,

Martin Puppe



________________________________









________________________________



JAM Software GmbH

Managing Director: Joachim Marder

Am Wissenschaftspark 26 * 54296 Trier * Germany

Phone: +49 (0)651-145 653 -0 * Fax: +49 (0)651-145 653 -29

Commercial register number HRB 4920 (AG Wittlich) http://www.jam-software.com



________________________________









________________________________



JAM Software GmbH

Geschäftsführer: Joachim Marder

Am Wissenschaftspark 26 * 54296 Trier * Germany

Tel: 0651-145 653 -0 * Fax: 0651-145 653 -29

Handelsregister Nr. HRB 4920 (AG Wi!

 ttlich)

http://www.jam-software.de

Reply via email to