Is MailScanner affected by the Redhat bug

[Alex Broens]

On 9/18/2008 11:41 AM, Julian Field wrote:
> 
> 
> Alex Broens wrote:
>> On 9/18/2008 10:25 AM, Jason Ede wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info [mailto:mailscanner-
>>>> bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf Of ram
>>>> Sent: 09 September 2008 15:00
>>>> To: MailScanner discussion
>>>> Subject: Re: Is MailScanner affected by the Redhat bug
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 13:01 +0100, Greg Matthews wrote:
>>>>> ram wrote:
>>>>>> I have all my servers running MailScanner on Centos. Is MailScanner
>>>>>> greatly affected by the Bug ?
>>>>>> Should I upgrade perl on my machines  ?
>>>>> I've ran tests last week on CentOS 4 and CentOS 5. CentOS 4.6 is
>>>>> unaffected but CentOS 5.2 does contain the bug. However, it is not
>>>> clear
>>>>> that this performance issue unduly affects MailScanner as other
>>>>> latencies are likely to dominate.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I did some testing myself .. There is apparently absolutely no affect
>>>> on
>>>> MailScanner
>>>>
>>>> took ~1000 mails to a test machine , Centos 5 , 4GB Ram ,
>>>> with the perlbug and run it under MailScanner ( MailScanner + SA +
>>>> customscanner + f-prot6 + clamavmodule )
>>>>
>>>> It takes 18 minutes with the perl bug and it same time (infact took 15s
>>>> more)  after I upgraded perl with the patch on http://people.centos.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So That is not any major affect after all :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Ram
>>>
>>> CentOS have released the patch for this. Installed this morning and 
>>> confirmed it fixes the bless issue.
>>
>> could become a dependency party...
>> my Centos 5 testbox complained about version conflicts concerning
>>
>>  perl-Math-BigInt
>>  perl-IO
>>  perl-bignum
> Delete these RPMs, upgrade Perl, then just re-run the MailScanner 
> installer and it will put back the bits it needs. This is pretty quick 
> and harmless.

re-installing the 3 modules was safer and faster...

btw: I have the feeling your Clam-SA installer has a bit of a historical 
mess of SA .pre files and overwrites existing files/settings

seems plugins laods are redundant.
IMO, if the .pre files already exist, they shouldn't be overwritten as 
they contain admin defined settings.

I haven't written down the whole follow up of what is redundant and what 
not, but I know I've disabled/removed some loadplugin lines which were 
redundant.

Alex