This is a discussion on Re: No Bayes!! - SpamAssassin ; Lindsay Haisley wrote: > On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 15:43 -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 02:27:36PM -0500, Lindsay Haisley wrote: >>> So what's the best fix for this? Should one just freeze SA at ...
Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 15:43 -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 02:27:36PM -0500, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
>>> So what's the best fix for this? Should one just freeze SA at an
>>> earlier version on a production server until this is fixed upstream? Is
>>> upstream aware of the problem and working on a fix for it?
>> You need to debug your installation and figure out what the problem is. Bayes
>> works fine in 3.2.
> Obvously, for some of us, it doesn't. I can take the time to determine
> the conditions that cause the failure, but I don't have a lot of time to
> work on debugging this kind if thing if my installation works fine with
> an earlier version of SA. If the developers upstream are aware of the
> problem and working on it, then any debugging I might do would very
> likely be a waste of my time - hence my question.
I can't recall a bug open for anything like this. Please visit
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/ and file a complete bug report.
Please describe the exact problem you are seeing as well as full debug
output. A random thread on the users list won't necessarily get
The developers are not aware of such a problem, best bet is to make them
I myself have been using Bayes SQL longer than anyone and have had no
problems recently upgrading from 3.1.8 to 3.2. Also, the Bayes code has
been very stable, with little to no changes over the last few releases,
especially in the storage code, so its likely a config or environment issue.
Without proper debugging it will be hard to tell what exactly is the cause.