On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 12:36:43PM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > On Mon,28.Jul.08, 14:57:16, Arvind Marathe wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 1:42 AM, Andrei Popescu > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun,27.Jul.08, 17:07:29, Arvind Marathe wrote: > > > > > >> OK some more investigation. All the d-u mails, getting listed as spam, > > >> have X-Spam-Checker-Version, X-Spam-Level and X-Spam-Status, in their > > >> headers. For eg. one of the mails has: > > >> > > >> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on > > >> liszt.debian.org > > >> X-Spam-Level: > > >> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=4.0 tests=MDO_DATING2 autolearn=no > > >> version=3.2.3 > > >> > > >> Andrei's mails and the mutt mailing list mails do not have these > > >> headers. > > > > > > Gee, glad to know I'm special cased! I think it's actually due to the > > > fact that I'm using gmail as well. > > > > I don't think so. I still think it is because you "cc" to me. All > > mails that were "cc"ed to me were dumped fine. And my own mails (from > > gmail) to the list, which did not have my address as "cc", were dumped > > as spam. > > Hhmm, interesting... > > > > Are you sure you don't want to try > > > maildrop instead of procmail? > > > > Busy right now, but won't mind trying it after a few days. Is it > > better than procmail? how? > > Because you can actually read the rules? :) Don't worry, it's just a > matter of preference, like vim vs. emacs, KDE vs. Gnome. You will find > strong advocates on both sides, but in the end it's a matter of > preference.
Hmm - i have only used procmail. Sometime i will try maildrop. Depending on whether i like it, i'll join one of the camps and either credit you or curse you ;) Arvind -- Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
