On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Nathanael Noblet <nathan...@gnat.ca> wrote: > On 06/13/2013 08:53 PM, P.V.Anthony wrote: >> On 14/06/2013 04:41, David Rees wrote: >>> Following up on this list for the archives: The systems affected by >>> this were running PostgreSQL 9.2. But dspam was linked against either >>> 8.4 or 9.0. Recompiling dspam against 9.2 seems to have solved the >>> problem - will do more testing to confirm for sure! >> >> Oh no. >> >> I hope the rpm package I am using in CentOS 6 64bit is complied againt >> PostgreSQL 9.2. I am using PostgreSQL 9.2.
Have you had any similar issues or is it working OK? >> Any comments from the person who packages dspam for CentOS 6 64bit? > > It'll be linked against whatever PostgreSQL is available from RHEL. I > would surmise that postgres 9.2 isn't in the stock CentOS/EPEL repos? No, RHEL 6 ships with pg 8.4. RHEL 5 ships with pg 8.1. EPEL doesn't package a newer version, neither does CentOS. PostgreSQL has "official" RPMs for any supported version at http://yum.postgresql.org/, but I've always compiled from source. I see that EPEL does have dspam 3.10.2 for CentOS 6. Don't know what patches they might include with it, haven't checked out the src rpm. BTW so far after recompiling dspam it seems to be working OK and training appears to be working as expected. -Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Dspam-user mailing list Dspam-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspam-user
