Latest upstream release: 1.2.1
Current version/release in rawhide: 1.1.3-3.fc36
URL: https://github.com/spamhaus/spamassassin-dqs

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream.


Based on the information from Anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/218334/

FEDORA-2022-d5c97411c0 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-d5c97411c0

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-186f056cd6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-186f056cd6

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-186f056cd6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-186f056cd6

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

FEDORA-2022-d5c97411c0 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-d5c97411c0`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-d5c97411c0

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

The instructions for installation in README.md state to use "your_DQS_key" as the term to search and replace in sh.cf, however this is already replaced in the packaged file by a DQS key that is replicated in many places in sh.cf

Is this respecting the Spamhaus licensing for use of the "free" DNSBL DQS service? It looks like if a Fedora user enables the plugin and doesn't change anything the load of this key will increase and Spamhaus may have a problem with that.

I am sorry, I do not get the problem that you are trying to describe.

All DQS keys inside the README.md are actually only examples. The example DQS keys in the README.md do not work (and if these DQS keys should ever work for whatever mistake on Spamhaus side, it's soley the problem of Spamhaus, because they're distributing exactly this README.md on GitHub and in their releases). Any user of the SpamAssassin DQS plugin should register at Spamhaus and get an own DQS key - as the README.md says.

Does this clarify your question?

https://github.com/spamhaus/spamassassin-dqs/blob/master/README.md#install-from-github with the sed(1) calls is what you're specifically referring to, right? This is a non-working example DQS key.

(In reply to Robert Scheck from comment #8)
> https://github.com/spamhaus/spamassassin-dqs/blob/master/README.md#install-
> from-github with the sed(1) calls is what you're specifically referring to,
> right? This is a non-working example DQS key.

Yes, you have made that clear now although I did not find the explanation that this is a non-working example key in the docs provided.

What I am saying is that this command:

sed -i -e 's/your_DQS_key/aip7yig6sahg6ehsohn5shco3z/g' sh.cf

fails because there is no "your_DQS_key" string in the sh.cf file, of course I would be using:

sed -i -e 's/your_DQS_key/<my_DQS_key>/g' sh.cf

where my_DQS_key is as obtained from Spamhaus.

My suggestion is to replace all instances of 'aip7yig6sahg6ehsohn5shco3z' in sh.cf and README.md with 'your_DQS_key'

This ensures that the README.md file instructions work and encourage people to actually get their own key.

I've filed https://github.com/spamhaus/spamassassin-dqs/issues/47 at upstream - and your report confirms my fear that the packaging and/or configuration of this SpamAssassin plugin needs to happen in a somehow better way.

Thanks for that. I wasn't sure exactly where the problem originated but clearly you knew where to report my concerns.

FEDORA-EPEL-2022-186f056cd6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

FEDORA-2022-d5c97411c0 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.