Hello Noel,
Monday, November 17, 2014, 1:42:35 AM, you wrote:
NB In the context you quote - yes,
NB but upon reading Harry's original - *no* it was not condescending (and he
made a valid point)
Been more tactful to make it a day earlier when I pondered-
I'm tempted to try-
yum install
-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch
Verifying : perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch
Installed:
perl-Mail-SPF.noarch 0:2.8.0-2.el6
Complete!
Now for the other missing modules
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpIlalSsU1co.pgp
Description: PGP signature
://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch.rpm
Installing : perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch
Verifying : perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch
Installed:
perl-Mail-SPF.noarch 0:2.8.0-2.el6
Complete!
Now for the other missing modules
signature.asc
Description
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 16, 2014, 6:19:03 PM, you wrote:
RH don't get me wrong but you need first to learn how to operate your OS
Condescending or what?
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpWVDlBzQqPf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Am 16.11.2014 um 19:49 schrieb Niamh Holding:
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 16, 2014, 6:19:03 PM, you wrote:
RH don't get me wrong but you need first to learn how to operate your OS
Condescending or what?
no, otherwise i would have not posted the yum command how to search perl
packages
Hello Reindl,
Sunday, November 16, 2014, 6:54:05 PM, you wrote:
RH download packages you can have with a yum command via http bypasses any
RH security (MITM as well as no gpg check otherwise happens in context of yum)
That's Axb told!
--
Best regards,
Niamh
On 17/11/2014 04:49, Niamh Holding wrote:
WARNING: contains undecipherable part
RH don't get me wrong but you need first to learn how to operate your OS
Condescending or what?
In the context you quote - yes,
but upon reading Harry's original - *no* it was not condescending (and
he
Hello Reindl,
Friday, November 14, 2014, 7:51:23 PM, you wrote:
install the epel-release package on CentOS - i would call that repo
mandatory and it *never* collides with the base-repos
repo id
base
epel
extras
rpmforge
updates
So back to yum to install?
--
Best regards,
Holtain
Am 15.11.2014 um 09:59 schrieb Niamh Holding:
Hello Reindl,
Friday, November 14, 2014, 7:51:23 PM, you wrote:
install the epel-release package on CentOS - i would call that repo
mandatory and it *never* collides with the base-repos
repo id
base
epel
extras
rpmforge
updates
So back to yum
On 15.11.14 10:09, Reindl Harald wrote:
in case of packages you need and available yes!
* only download them and install by rpm without
have the repo enabled will not update them in
the future until you do by hand
* if you have the repo enabled there is no point
in download and use rpm
Hello Axb,
Friday, November 14, 2014, 7:32:17 PM, you wrote:
What's the requiremenet?
What does Perl Makefile.PL ask for?
The output of perl Makefile.PL is in the root message, for example-
NOTE: the optional Mail::SPF module is not installed.
--
Best regards,
Holtain
Hello Axb,
Saturday, November 15, 2014, 11:21:51 AM, you wrote:
By now, I assume you've solved the problem
Well...
I'm tempted to try-
yum install Mail-SPF, but all the differing advice here has made me wary.
--
Best regards,
Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
On 13.11.14 14:34, Giles Coochey wrote:
I avoid the distribution perl completely, and use perlbrew and
spamassassin 3.4.0 compiled from source, with a specific perlbrew
perl version I avoid breaking the version of perl that comes with the
system and can satisfy all dependencies via CPAN.
how
On 14/11/2014 11:26, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 13.11.14 14:34, Giles Coochey wrote:
I avoid the distribution perl completely, and use perlbrew and
spamassassin 3.4.0 compiled from source, with a specific perlbrew
perl version I avoid breaking the version of perl that comes with the
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 2:21:44 PM, you wrote:
If you need need extra modules which are not provided by Centos go to
http://pkgs.repoforge.org/
Just looking, so don't shoot me but
http://pkgs.repoforge.org/perl-Mail-SPF/
has nothing listed later than CentOS 5
PS I hate
On 11/14/2014 08:18 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 2:21:44 PM, you wrote:
If you need need extra modules which are not provided by Centos go to
http://pkgs.repoforge.org/
Just looking, so don't shoot me but
http://pkgs.repoforge.org/perl-Mail-SPF/
has
Am 14.11.2014 um 20:44 schrieb Axb:
I don't use SA's SPF stuff so you caught me here...
My repoforge suggestion was mainly for Centos 5.x
I'd go for
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/perl-Mail-SPF-2.8.0-2.el6.noarch.rpm
It installs without extra dependencies and plays nice with
OS CentOS 6.4
yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6
So I'm building 3.4.0 from source but Makefile.PL reports missing
moduiles, should these be installed from CPAN?
***
NOTE: the optional Mail::SPF module is not installed.
Used
On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
OS CentOS 6.4
6.4 is old - centos 6.6
(do you seriously make a point of running old versions?)
yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6
forget SA from YUM /Distro packages. - it ties you to, as Benny sez,
precompiled problems :)
So I'm building 3.4.0
On 13.11.14 14:09, Niamh Holding wrote:
OS CentOS 6.4
yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6
So I'm building 3.4.0 from source but Makefile.PL reports missing
moduiles, should these be installed from CPAN?
...via yum, whenever possible
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ;
On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
OS CentOS 6.4
6.4 is old - centos 6.6
(do you seriously make a point of running old versions?)
yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6
On 13.11.14 15:21, Axb wrote:
forget SA from YUM /Distro packages. - it ties you to, as Benny sez,
precompiled problems
On 13/11/2014 14:21, Axb wrote:
On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
OS CentOS 6.4
6.4 is old - centos 6.6
(do you seriously make a point of running old versions?)
yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6
forget SA from YUM /Distro packages. - it ties you to, as Benny sez,
precompiled
Am 13.11.2014 um 15:21 schrieb Axb:
On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
OS CentOS 6.4
6.4 is old - centos 6.6
(do you seriously make a point of running old versions?)
yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6
forget SA from YUM /Distro packages. - it ties you to, as Benny sez,
precompiled
On 11/13/2014 03:35 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
OS CentOS 6.4
6.4 is old - centos 6.6
(do you seriously make a point of running old versions?)
yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6
On 13.11.14 15:21, Axb wrote:
forget SA from YUM /Distro
On 11/13/2014 03:34 PM, Giles Coochey wrote:
I avoid the distribution perl completely, and use perlbrew and
spamassassin 3.4.0 compiled from source, with a specific perlbrew perl
version I avoid breaking the version of perl that comes with the system
and can satisfy all dependencies via CPAN.
On 11/13/2014 9:51 AM, Axb wrote:
On 11/13/2014 03:34 PM, Giles Coochey wrote:
I avoid the distribution perl completely, and use perlbrew and
spamassassin 3.4.0 compiled from source, with a specific perlbrew perl
version I avoid breaking the version of perl that comes with the system
and can
On 11/13/2014 03:42 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.11.2014 um 15:21 schrieb Axb:
On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
OS CentOS 6.4
6.4 is old - centos 6.6
(do you seriously make a point of running old versions?)
yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6
forget SA from YUM /Distro packages.
Am 13.11.2014 um 15:55 schrieb Axb:
On 11/13/2014 03:42 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.11.2014 um 15:21 schrieb Axb:
On 11/13/2014 03:09 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
OS CentOS 6.4
6.4 is old - centos 6.6
(do you seriously make a point of running old versions?)
yum only offers 3.3.1-3.el6
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 2:21:44 PM, you wrote:
(do you seriously make a point of running old versions?)
If it ain't broke don't mess with it!
Given that the other server is now dead after the suggested yum update :(
Dead as in booting up from a spare disk in the raid assay
On 11/13/2014 04:22 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 2:21:44 PM, you wrote:
(do you seriously make a point of running old versions?)
If it ain't broke don't mess with it!
what about security updates?
Given that the other server is now dead after the
On 11/13/2014 04:17 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
least effort *now* but in 3 years on that machine...
that gives the victim enough time to learn the process and apply to a
new setup...
and you're suggesting he change distro
no, i just said if you bypass the package management, bring manual
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 3:40:53 PM, you wrote:
the lady can start a weekend knowing the box is
tagging spam.
First I have to get the damned ISP to stop blocking port 53 so the world
knows where to send the spam.
Most of yesterday was spent trying to work out why DNS was
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 3:29:00 PM, you wrote:
what about security updates?
Bash and ssl were addressed when announced.
A spare array disk should only be a crutch till you replace the original
disk.. simple BCP.
It's not a crutch it's booting up to how the server was 2
On November 13, 2014 3:55:05 PM Axb axb.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Pls stay in your hole and allow me to get this guy off this thread.
http://www.centos.org/ seem centos 7 is there now, but its still a problem
if there is no maintainers of spamassassin there, rule updates with iso
files, hmm
Hello Benny,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 4:29:32 PM, you wrote:
if there is no maintainers of spamassassin there
That's why I build from source, I'm not aware od a 3.4.0 rpm either.
--
Best regards,
Holtainmailto:holt...@hotmail.com
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
I disagree. I often tell people to put a screwdriver near the server and
convince it you will dismantle it AND you don't know how to rebuild it.
Keeps the server on it's toes far better than if it thinks we know what we're
doing...
That and put
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 5:45:02 PM, you wrote:
sometimes a small hint can save time and frustration...
are you nearly there by now?
Looks not to bad, even if for reasons stated I can only test from within
the LAN-
Nov 13 18:24:21 magnesium spamd[21634]: spamd: connection
Am 13.11.2014 um 19:26 schrieb Niamh Holding:
Though spamassassin doesn't currently appear in the chkconfig --list
chkconfig --add spamassassin
[harry@srv-rhsoft:~]$ chkconfig --help
chkconfig Version 1.3.63 - Copyright (C) 1997-2008 Red Hat, Inc.
Kostenlose Weitergabe unter den Bedingungen
On 11/13/2014 07:26 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 5:45:02 PM, you wrote:
sometimes a small hint can save time and frustration...
are you nearly there by now?
Looks not to bad, even if for reasons stated I can only test from within
the LAN-
Nov 13
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 6:33:35 PM, you wrote:
or are you using procmail?
Yep
:0fw spamassassin.lock
* 512000
| /usr/local/bin/spamc -u spamtest
# | /usr/local/bin/spamassassin
# All mail with a score 10 is dumped to /dev/null
:0
* ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*
On 11/13/2014 07:50 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 6:33:35 PM, you wrote:
or are you using procmail?
Yep
:0fw spamassassin.lock
* 512000
| /usr/local/bin/spamc -u spamtest
# | /usr/local/bin/spamassassin
# All mail with a score 10 is dumped to /dev/null
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 6:56:05 PM, you wrote:
so spamd is running?
Something started it so now you gotta find it to make sure you can
stop/start the service if required.
Me started it-
service spamassassin start :)
I had the init scripts in a backup from the main server.
Am 13.11.2014 um 20:10 schrieb Niamh Holding:
Hello Axb,
Thursday, November 13, 2014, 6:56:05 PM, you wrote:
so spamd is running?
Something started it so now you gotta find it to make sure you can
stop/start the service if required.
Me started it-
service spamassassin start :)
I had the
43 matches
Mail list logo
