Patch 411

[Thomas Cameron]

All -

I am running RH 9.0, sendmail-8.12.8-5.90, and spamass-milter-0.1.3a.  I
want to check mail with SA on a relay only server, and redirect tagged spam
to address@hidden

I want to apply patch 411, but when I applied this patch but I got this:

address@hidden spamass-milter-0.1.3a]# patch -p0 < ../patch
patching file spamass-milter.cpp
Hunk #3 FAILED at 165.
Hunk #6 succeeded at 317 with fuzz 1.
Hunk #7 FAILED at 447.
Hunk #8 FAILED at 463.
Hunk #9 FAILED at 742.
4 out of 9 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file spamass-milter.cpp.rej
patching file spamass-milter.h

The spamass-milter.cpp.rej is at the bottom of this message.

Is this acceptable?  If not, what am I doing wrong?
--
Thomas Cameron, RHCE, CNE, MCSE, MCT
Cameron Technical Services, Inc.
(512) 454-3200 Main
http://www.camerontech.com


spamass-milter.cpp.rej:

***************
*** 163,168 ****
                                  flag_sniffuser = true;
                                  defaultuser = strdup(optarg);
                                  break;
                          case '?':
                                  err = 1;
                                  break;
--- 165,180 ----
                                  flag_sniffuser = true;
                                  defaultuser = strdup(optarg);
                                  break;
+                         case 'b':
+                                 flag_bucket = true;
+                                 // we will modify the recipient list; if
spamc returns
+                                 // indicating that this mail is spam, the
message will be
+                                 // sent to <optarg>@localhost
+                                 smfilter.xxfi_flags |= SMFIF_ADDRCPT; //
May add recipients
+                                 smfilter.xxfi_flags |= SMFIF_DELRCPT; //
May delete recipients
+                                 // XXX we should probably verify that
optarg is vaguely sane
+                                 spambucket = strdup( optarg );
+                                 break;
                          case '?':
                                  err = 1;
                                  break;
***************
*** 407,419 ****
  //
  // Gets called once for each recipient
  //
- // stores the first recipient in the spamassassin object and
- // discards the rest, keeping track of the number of recipients.
  //
  sfsistat
  mlfi_envrcpt(SMFICTX* ctx, char** envrcpt)
  {
          SpamAssassin* assassin =
static_cast<SpamAssassin*>(smfi_getpriv(ctx));

          if (assassin->numrcpt() == 0)
          {
--- 447,459 ----
  //
  // Gets called once for each recipient
  //
+ // stores all addresses and the number thereof (some redundancy)
  //
  sfsistat
  mlfi_envrcpt(SMFICTX* ctx, char** envrcpt)
  {
          SpamAssassin* assassin =
static_cast<SpamAssassin*>(smfi_getpriv(ctx));
+         char **rcpt;

          if (assassin->numrcpt() == 0)
          {
***************
*** 423,428 ****
          {
                  assassin->set_numrcpt();
          }
          return SMFIS_CONTINUE;
  }

--- 463,471 ----
          {
                  assassin->set_numrcpt();
          }
+         for( rcpt = envrcpt; *rcpt; rcpt++ ) {
+           assassin->recipients.push_back( *rcpt ); // XXX verify that this
worked
+         }
          return SMFIS_CONTINUE;
  }

***************
*** 699,704 ****
                          int status;
                          waitpid(pid, &status, 0);
                  }
          }
  };

--- 742,752 ----
                          int status;
                          waitpid(pid, &status, 0);
                  }
+         }
+
+         // Clean up the recip list. Might be overkill, but it's good
housekeeping.
+         while( !recipients.empty()) {
+           recipients.pop_front();
          }
  };