Bug 68 - Tests fail if ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs exists
Summary: Tests fail if ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs exists
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Spamassassin
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Libraries (show other bugs)
Version: 2.30CVS
Hardware: All All
: P2 minor
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: SpamAssassin Developer Mailing List
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
: 69 206 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2002-02-28 17:15 UTC by Duncan Findlay
Modified: 2002-06-15 03:58 UTC (History)
3 users (show)


Attachment Type Modified Status Actions Submitter/CLA Status
Make spamd and SA ignore user_prefs file during testing patch None Matthew Cline [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 Duncan Findlay 2002-02-28 17:15:56 UTC 
The following tests fail if subject_tag isn't the default.

t/spam.t 16,17
t/spamd.t 8,9
t/spamd_port.t 8,9
t/strip2.t 8,10
t/stripmarkup.t 6,7

Perhaps a confuguration should be specified to the tests?
Comment 1 Craig Hughes 2002-03-01 19:25:22 UTC 
*** Bug 69 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 2 Craig Hughes 2002-03-05 00:51:46 UTC 
Should just have make test use -x flag for spamd, and spamassassin should
implement a "-x"
Comment 3 Craig Hughes 2002-04-05 10:39:23 UTC 
Reassigning to list -- originally accepted before bugzilla policy 
change/clarification
Comment 4 Duncan Findlay 2002-04-11 18:00:35 UTC 
*** Bug 206 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 Matthew Cline 2002-04-11 18:07:46 UTC 
I have a patch that works, but I'm not sure if it's the proper way of doing it.
It gives "-x" to spamd, and "-p ../rules/user_prefs.template" to SA.
Comment 6 Matthew Cline 2002-04-11 18:08:28 UTC 
Created attachment 66 [details]
Make spamd and SA ignore user_prefs file during testing
Comment 7 Craig Hughes 2002-04-11 18:42:31 UTC 
Looks OK until someone complains...  Committing.
Comment 8 Duncan Findlay 2002-04-11 21:21:33 UTC 
*** Bug 207 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***