I upgraded to 1.20rc2, and the problem still occurs. According to the debug output of SA, it is not being called with the -u / username set. The Q-S logs confirm this. Am I missing something basic? Is there something I've missed in the configuration to explicitly state it? Here's a snippet:
Q-S qmail-queue.log
Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:28:51 -0400:29661: scanloop: scanner=clamuko_scanner,plain_text_msg=1
Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:28:51 -0400:29661: scanloop: scanner=spamassassin,plain_text_msg=1
Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:28:51 -0400:29661: SA: run /usr/bin/spamc -c -f < /var/spool/qmailscan/working/new/domain.com1062088
13145529661
Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:28:51 -0400:29661: spamassassin: finished scan of dir "/var/spool/qmailscan/domain.com106208813145529
661" in 0.607974 secs
The SA debug output:
debug: retrieving prefs for qmailq from SQL server
logmsg: Still running as root: user not specified with -u, not found, or set to root. Fall back to nobody.
logmsg: checking message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for qmailq:99.
Thoughts?
-- Steve
> Isnt this what this in the CHANGES for rc1 is?
My bad, I haven't been paying attention to the 1.1.20rc posts.
> * SpamAssassin now sets the spamc "username" field to the recipient address.
> This only happens if there is ONE recipient. If a spammer sends a spam to 20
> local users in one SMTP session, then no user-specific SA rules will
> apply, but all the general SA rules still do of course. Note: As spamc
> must be passed the recipient address on the commandline, Q-S has to strip
> back the e-mail address to shell-friendly chars - this should be fine for
> 99.9% of your e-mail addresses, but may mean that the more odd addresses won't
> be able to access their user-specific SA options. The address is also lowercased
> before being passed to spamc. Note that all this has no effect on the recipient
> address of the e-mail - just the address used for "spamc -u ..."
I suppose I should just go get the RC and play with it. Does it pass only the username part of the email to spamc? I have virtual users with vmailmgr, my spamc usernames are full email addresses, so I use spamc -u [EMAIL PROTECTED], not spamc -u joe. It was an easy mod to the perl code to accomplish this so I'm not too concerned.
Thx,
Josh
------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Qmail-scanner-general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qmail-scanner-general
------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Qmail-scanner-general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qmail-scanner-general
