spamassassin-users October 2010 archive
Main Archive Page > Month Archives  > spamassassin-users archives
spamassassin-users: Re: Latest Version Query

Re: Latest Version Query

From: Karsten Bräckelmann <guenther_at_nospam>
Date: Thu Oct 21 2010 - 22:23:37 GMT

On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 16:59 -0500, Clayton Keller wrote:
> On 10/21/2010 4:19 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:

> > I don't assume you will have that script do an unattended upgrade, would
> > you? Not a wise idea, in case some more fundamental things change like
> > with 3.3.
> >
> > So the script would notify you by mail? What would be the difference to
> > the announce list?
> Unattended upgrades were not my intention. I am as leery of that as you are.
> At this point I was just looking at different ways to determine the
> current stable release version available with the least amount of human
> interaction.
> Thank you for the added feedback.

Well, if you ultimately want some tool to monitor new releases of
various software (not SA only), I guess it should be trivial for the SA
bit to parse out of the download page, CPAN, an FTP mirror listing, or
services like freshmeat (RSS?).

If all you want is to be notified about updates of various software,
subscribing (possibly a role account) to each software's announce list
should do. It's generally *very* low-volume and hardly requires any
human interaction at all -- unless there's a new release. Sic!

If you want this basically for SA only, the announce list *is* the way
to go IMHO. Low volume, no interaction overhead whatsoever, and trivial
and quick to implement.

Since you mentioned ClamAV and how they do it -- it is my understanding
the version prefix in the "current" TXT record is not meant for any kind
of human monitoring itself -- but a way to allow freshclam to pester and
annoy the hell out of sysadmins watching the logs.

Something SA and sa-update does not do. Given the release history of
both these projects, and the number of added features and major changes
during the last two years, it seems to be warranted for Clam. It's a
different story with SA.

Even more so since 3.3, as we are migrating towards a workflow of more
frequent rule updates, independent of changes in the rather stable code

-- char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu\0.@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4"; main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1: (c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}