On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Bryan Hoover wrote:
> Craig R Hughes wrote:
>
> > spamd is the thing which is detaching itself from the terminal and
> > therefore losing SA debug messages;
>
> But these messages are dropped when SA is run from .procmailrc aren't
> they? That is, aren't SA's "warning" messsage only going to the
> terminal anyway
No, SA's "warning" messages are not going "to the terminal", and neither
are spamd's. They're going to the standard error, which only happens to
be "the terminal" when you start SA or spamd from an interactive shell.
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Bryan Hoover wrote:
> Craig R Hughes wrote:
>
> Just seems to me that if a program's logging, e.g., SA, is set to go to
> the screen
I don't know what gave you this idea about SA, but it's not the case.
> then, unless it offers some sort of config. or switch, there's no need
> for another program to alter its behavior - though, as you mentioned,
> procmail does it.
Procmail does nothing more than pass its own stderr descriptor along to
any sub-process that it starts. The only thing special about procmail is
that you can use the rc file to tell it where to point its own stderr.
(You do that by assigning a file name to the LOGFILE variable.)
Doing
LOGFILE=/some/log/file
:0
| spamassassin -P
in a procmailrc is essentially equivalent to doing
exec 2>/some/log/file
spamassassin -P
in a shell script.
_______________________________________________________________
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
