Well I think it's tied to 3.4.4s release so I don't think I should have done an update in the root but rules and rulesrc likely should get updated.
I'd like to focus on 3.4.5 and 4.0 if you can dig into this issue. On Fri, Jan 1, 2021, 11:48 John Hardin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 1 Jan 2021, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > > > So I logged onto sa-vm and sudo'd to automc, when to svn/trunk and did > svn > > update in rules. See below. [1] Note the cron job shows: Checked out > > revision 1885000. From looking at the script, it does a checkout of > > rulesrc not rules so this might be "expected" behavior. NOT sure if > things > > were stale or if we use one revision for a week or something. > > It should update rules/ every time as well, as those files are *not* > reliably static enough to be left alone for any length of time. They could > potentially change at any time, even though they generally haven't. > > Is there any reason we should not be updating the entire trunk/ tree? Why > are we picking and choosing? > > I think the run_nightly script in SVN should be updated to retrieve rules/ > as well, or just all of trunk/ to avoid problems (e.g. with references to > modified plugins). > > > > The URG_BIZ and the ADVANCED fee issues were something I saw in the crons > > but they came in out of order and with no idea of the real dates so I was > > waiting for the latest email with the output to check things. > > > > Out of interest, did you make changes to those rules and possibly in 2 > > commits? > > Nope. They were related so I kept them together in the same commit: > https://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1884468 > > > > Trying to figure out if something went wrong or not but my > > eyesight is not good enough today to follow all the various cron jobs for > > rules. > > The __URG_BIZ change was the 15th, so a couple of weekly runs have > occurred since then and didn't automagically repair it. > > I think that it's a design error in the script vs. something going wrong > in correct code. > > > > Anyway, I ran the same command after the svn > > up, ~/svn/trunk/build/mkupdates/run_nightly | /usr/bin/tee /var/www/ > > automc.spamassassin.org/mkupdates/mkupdates.txt and it passes now and it > > published a ruleset that passes lint for me with 4.0. > > > > Regards, > > KAM > > > > [1] > > > > U 20_vbounce.cf > > U 60_whitelist.cf > > U 50_scores.cf > > U 60_whitelist_auth.cf > > U 20_phrases.cf > > Updated to revision 1885008. > > > > and in the root > > > > U CREDITS > > U rulesrc/sandbox/gbechis/20_freemail.cf > > U rulesrc/sandbox/gbechis/20_misc.cf > > U lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/VBounce.pm > > U lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/DKIM.pm > > U lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/FreeMail.pm > > U lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/SPF.pm > > U lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/WLBLEval.pm > > U lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf.pm > > A t/spf_welcome_block.t > > A t/blocklist_autolearn.t > > U t/data/01_test_rules.cf > > A t/freemail_welcome_block.t > > U MANIFEST > > U NOTICE > > Updated to revision 1885008. > > > > > > > > [2] > > automc@sa-vm:~/svn/trunk$ ~/svn/trunk/build/mkupdates/run_nightly | > > /usr/bin/tee /var/www/automc.spamassassin.org/mkupdates/mkupdates.txt > > {much snippage} > > > -- > > Kevin A. McGrail > > Member, Apache Software Foundation > > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171 > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 1, 2021 at 10:35 AM John Hardin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 1 Jan 2021, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > >> > >>> Does anyone have some time to look into this error? It's why I wanted > to > >>> fix the server sending logs because I didn't think rules were being > >>> published. > >>> > >>> t/basic_lint.t .................. ok > >>> t/basic_lint_without_sandbox.t .. ok > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_2_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >> > >> __URG_BIZ is defined in trunk/rules/20_phrases.cf and it's still > there... > >> > >> That test succeeds here in my scripted testing: > >> > >> --- running basic_meta.t > >> 1..2 > >> ok 1 > >> ok 2 > >> > >> All of my pre-commit lint checks are passing. > >> > >> Here's the relevant part of a full "make test": > >> > >> t/all_modules.t ................... ok > >> t/authres.t ....................... ok > >> t/autolearn.t ..................... ok > >> t/autolearn_force.t ............... ok > >> t/autolearn_force_fail.t .......... ok > >> t/basic_lint.t .................... ok > >> t/basic_lint_without_sandbox.t .... ok > >> t/basic_meta.t .................... ok > >> t/basic_meta2.t ................... ok > >> t/basic_obj_api.t ................. ok > >> > >> > >> Is trunk/rules/20_phrases.cf somehow stale in the masscheck SVN > sandbox? > >> It should have been updated at the same time as the ADVANCE_FEE rules > got > >> __URG_BIZ. > >> > >> > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_4_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_5_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_3_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_3_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_4_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_2_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_5_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_5_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_2_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_4_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_3_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_3_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_2_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_4_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> __ADVANCE_FEE_5_NEW depends on __URG_BIZ which is nonexistent > >>> > >>> # Failed test at t/basic_meta.t line 93. > >>> # Looks like you failed 1 test of 2. > >>> t/basic_meta.t .................. > >>> Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100) > >>> Failed 1/2 subtests > >>> > >>> Test Summary Report > >>> ------------------- > >>> t/basic_meta.t (Wstat: 256 Tests: 2 Failed: 1) > >>> Failed test: 2 > >>> Non-zero exit status: 1 > >>> Files=3, Tests=6, 4 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr 0.00 sys + 3.44 cusr > >> 0.36 > >>> csys = 3.82 CPU) > >>> Result: FAIL > >>> Failed 1/3 test programs. 1/6 subtests failed. > >>> make: *** [Makefile:1380: test_dynamic] Error 1 > >>> + exit > >>> > > -- > John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ > [email protected] pgpk -a [email protected] > key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > This is a lame apocalypse. No zombies, and > the slow spiral to destruction has taken so long, > I think some people lost interest. -- STS > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > 216 days since the first private commercial manned orbital mission > (SpaceX) >
