http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3625
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-08-31 11:24 -------
Based on what I saw last week, the syslog call (at least under 5.6.1) doesn't
seem to fail. Here's a diff that fixes the problem by saying if we receive
SIGPIPE re-open syslog regardless of whether we got a syslog failure or not.
Any flaws in this plan? Do processes regularly get SIGPIPE calls that would
make this a bad thing? Anyway, here's the diff:
--- spamd.orig Tue Aug 31 10:44:36 2004
+++ spamd Tue Aug 31 12:01:02 2004
@@ -1679,19 +1679,13 @@
# install a new handler for SIGPIPE -- this signal has been
# found to occur with syslog-ng after syslog-ng restarts.
- local $SIG{'PIPE'} = sub { $main::SIGPIPE_RECEIVED++ };
-
- eval { syslog( 'info', "%s", $msg ); };
-
- if ($@) {
- if ($main::SIGPIPE_RECEIVED) {
-
+ local $SIG{'PIPE'} = sub {
+ $main::SIGPIPE_RECEIVED++;
# SIGPIPE received when writing to syslog -- close and reopen
# the log handle, then try again.
closelog();
openlog_for_spamd();
syslog( 'debug', "%s", "syslog reopened" );
- syslog( 'info', "%s", $msg );
# now report what happend
$msg = "SIGPIPE received, reopening log socket";
@@ -1703,10 +1697,12 @@
if ( $main::SIGPIPE_RECEIVED > 1 ) {
warn "logging failure: multiple SIGPIPEs received\n";
}
-
$main::SIGPIPE_RECEIVED = 0;
- }
- else {
+ };
+
+ eval { syslog( 'info', "%s", $msg ); };
+
+ if ($@) {
warn "syslog() failed: $@"; # includes a \n
# only write this warning once. it gets annoying fast
@@ -1714,7 +1710,6 @@
warn "try using --syslog-socket={unix,inet} or --syslog=file\n";
$already_done_syslog_failure_warning = 1;
}
- }
}
}
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
