spamassassin-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tom Hendrikx <>
Subject Re: spamc exit code for exceeding max size
Date Thu, 10 Jan 2013 22:16:07 GMT
On 10-01-13 22:43, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> On 1/10/2013 3:16 PM, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
>> Since I wrap spamc with a different programming language, I have all
>> the tools available to handle any error condition: detecting EX_TOOBIG
>> is however not possible. 
> I don't understand this as I use MD to call spamc.  Why can't you just
> check the file size prior to calling sa?

Because I don't want to maintain the maxsize in two places? Because I
still want to catch the error when someone lowers only the maxsize
settings because he did not RTFM?

I want to handle the error as spamc throws it at me, implementing a
second safety net is a waste. Given enough development time and cpu
cycles, I could safeguard against all possible errors that spamc is able
to return before I actually execute it, but it would be easier to just
build a new version of spamc in stead.

> Otherwise, like I said, now's the time to open a bug and work on a patch
> if you are interested in this.

Yes, that is why I was discussing the different options available.
Adding another 17 switches for different scenarios is ugly, the existing
6(!) already look disappointingly overcomplicated to me. So I'd be happy
to contribute a patch that contains an elegant solution, but not another
kludge that fixes only my stupid little issue but makes matters worse in
the long run. As said, creating a kludge in the surrounding code is just
as ugly, but much faster.


View raw message