Bug 1641 - minor fixes in EvalTests
Summary: minor fixes in EvalTests
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Spamassassin
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Rules (Eval Tests) (show other bugs)
Version: SVN Trunk (Latest Devel Version)
Hardware: Other other
: P5 normal
Target Milestone: 2.50
Assignee: SpamAssassin Developer Mailing List
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: backport
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-03-14 11:26 UTC by Justin Mason
Modified: 2003-03-18 06:37 UTC (History)
0 users


Attachment Type Modified Status Actions Submitter/CLA Status
fix to both bugs patch None Justin Mason [HasCLA]
fix for razor module-loading patch None Justin Mason [HasCLA]
fix for other bug patch None Justin Mason [HasCLA]
drops AnyDBM_File, uses DB_File directly instead patch None Justin Mason [HasCLA]
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Justin Mason 2003-03-14 11:26:36 UTC 
2 buglets: 
 
- Razor was being loaded even with -L switch 
 
- AnyDBM_File module was not specified although we now use it in EvalTests
Comment 1 Justin Mason 2003-03-14 11:27:22 UTC 
Created attachment 751 [details]
fix to both bugs
Comment 2 Malte S. Stretz 2003-03-15 10:33:22 UTC 
Please open separate bugs even for trivial patches. 
 
I can OKAY only the first one (already committed), I don't know about the 
second. Is it really the right way to hardcode the {DB,GDBM,SDBM,NDBM}_File 
into the AnyDBM_File @ISA? It looks fishy to mee but I don't know anything 
about this code.
Comment 3 Justin Mason 2003-03-15 11:33:55 UTC 
Created attachment 753 [details]
fix for razor module-loading
Comment 4 Justin Mason 2003-03-15 11:34:20 UTC 
Created attachment 754 [details]
fix for other bug
Comment 5 Daniel Quinlan 2003-03-15 12:26:29 UTC 
Malte: that patch was not OKAY for 24 hours.

OKAY: patch 754 (third attachment) is fine, this has been in HEAD for
a while.
Comment 6 Justin Mason 2003-03-15 13:18:41 UTC 
Actually, Malte -- first off, that's how AnyDBM_File works.   But you're right,
in a way ;)  

When I think about it, I have never seen an access-db that doesn't use the
Berkeley DB format, so we don't need to use AnyDBM_File at all.  Instead this
new patch *just* uses DB_File, and protects against failing its load if that
module is not available.  I've tested that SA still works OK without DB_File
being present, so this works, but I'd like an OKAY from Theo on it first...
Comment 7 Justin Mason 2003-03-15 13:19:26 UTC 
Created attachment 755 [details]
drops AnyDBM_File, uses DB_File directly instead
Comment 8 Theo Van Dinter 2003-03-17 07:47:12 UTC 
OKAY: the changes look ok to me for the accessdb change.  however, 
that's not in 2.5, so you didn't need to wait for me anyway. ;)

I'll apply the patch to my code to actually test it, but it looks like it ought to 
work.  I used AnyDBM since I figured people may want the functionality 
without the standard tools, so they could use non DB_File modules.  <
shrug>
Comment 9 Justin Mason 2003-03-18 15:37:24 UTC 
OK, the first patch (the is_razor2_available one) was applied quite a while
ago.  The second patch is applied to HEAD, which is the only place it's
applicable.  So this bug is closed.