> -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: vrijdag 6 oktober 2006 4:33 > To: Mark > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Upgrading from SpamAssassin 2.55
Wow; that was a very comprehensive and useful answer. :) Part of the reason I've been postponing the upgrade is because my setup relies on the -u functionality of spamc. Thanks. - Mark > Mark wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I'm finally upgrading from SpamAssassin 2.55 (tweaked > > myself, over time) > > to 3.1.6. I have a few questions regarding this upgrade. > > > > In the "old" SA, I had a file called ConfSourceSQL.pm, which did the > > per-user stuff for MySQL. I cannot seem to find a similar file in > > function. I see BayesStore/MySQL.pm, but that's not what > > I'm looking for > > (I just want the file that retrieves the per-user MySQL settings). > > > > I also read somewhere that you can no longer parse the -u > > option to spamc. > > Parse? or pass? You can still pass -u to spamc. That's not changed in > any way I'm aware of from 2.55 to 3.1.6. > > According to the docs you shouldn't use -u to cause spamc's > environment > (ie: where ~/ is), but I say that's nothing but shenanigans. Your > version of spamassassin says the same thing. Check the spamc > manpage on > your system.. > > The spamc docs have claimed -u is "semi obsoleted" and you should su > first for a very long time. In fact, the docs for this > argument haven't > changed since at least 2.40. I say it's a crock. > > Someone implemented reading the current userid a long time > ago and then > updated the docs in order to proclaim this as the only proper way. As > time has gone on, spamc -u has gotten more useful, not less. SA now > supports virtual users who only have SQL stored configurations. How's > that work if you shouldn't use -u? > > I'd ignore this aspect of the docs as outdated rubbish made by someone > who envisioned the "new" feature as causing -u to eventually go away. > That's never come to pass, and probably never will. > > That said, if your user is su'able, there's no reason to not > su first.. > but you could use -u if you wanted. > > Some evidence: > > SA 2.40's spamc manpage (lifted from a freshly downloaded > tarball from cpan) > --------------- > item -u username > > This argument has been semi-obsoleted. To have spamd use > per-user-config > files, run spamc as the user whose config files spamd should load. If > you're > running spamc as some other user, though, (eg. root, mail, nobody, > cyrus, etc.) > then you can still use this flag. > --------------- > > SA 2.50's spamc man page (lifted from a local tarball) > --------------- > item -u username > > This argument has been semi-obsoleted. To have spamd use > per-user-config > files, run spamc as the user whose config files spamd should load. If > you're > running spamc as some other user, though, (eg. root, mail, nobody, > cyrus, etc.) > then you can still use this flag. > --------------- > > SA 3.1.0's man page, lifted from > http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.1.x/dist/doc/spamc.html > > --------------- > > **-u* /username/* > > This argument has been semi-obsoleted. To have spamd use > per-user-config files, run spamc as the user whose config files > spamd should load. If you're running spamc as some other user, > though, (eg. root, mail, nobody, cyrus, etc.) then you > can still use this flag. > > ---------------
