On Sat, 2011-11-26 at 17:31 +0100, Paul Menzel wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 25.11.2011, 13:34 +0100 schrieb Milan Crha:
> That is bad. How does Evolution and the distribution interact? The
> distribution has this updated certificate [1] as you do
>
> $ openssl x509 -in /etc/ssl/certs/cacert.or
On Fri, 2011-11-25 at 11:13 -0500, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> I'm not sure [I don't use local mailboxes much]. I'd first wonder if
> "deleted messages" has any meaning for a local mailbox of it that is
> only implmented / supported / understood for IMAP [or other
> remote-store] mailboxes.
>
On Fri, 2011-11-25 at 18:18 +0100, Thomas Prost wrote:
> I still haven´t understood the need of the XP machine ?
> As I understand the problem, it´s to connect with evolution to an
> Exchange server, running at least Windows SERVER 2003 ?!! (or am I
> wrong?)
Hi,
2007+ it is. The evolution
On Fri, 2011-11-25 at 12:32 -0500, Daniel Hernandez Bahr wrote:
> I'm currently using Evolution 3.2.1 on Ubuntu Oneiric (11.10). I don't
> need to set up a proxy in order to connect to my imap o smtp servers,
> however I do need to set it up so I can use GnomeOnlineAccounts or have
> Empathy connec
Andre Klapper gmx.net> writes:
>
> On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 15:50 -0700, Patrick Topping wrote:
> > I recently upgraded from Evolution 2.x to 3.0.3 and ever since the
> > upgrade my Sent folder does not wok 99.99% of the time. It shows
> > errors like the following for every message in the folder:
Hello everyone,
I'm currently using Evolution 3.2.1 on Ubuntu Oneiric (11.10). I don't
need to set up a proxy in order to connect to my imap o smtp servers,
however I do need to set it up so I can use GnomeOnlineAccounts or have
Empathy connecting to Internet IM servers. When I do this Evolution
s
On Sun, 2011-11-27 at 10:28 -0500, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
> Still unclear on how to troubleshoot spam filtering in Evolution - I
> figured this out by looking at top and watching the SA db magic change.
Try running from a terminal window: CAMEL_DEBUG=junk evolution
Then watch the terminal for pro
Shouldn´t it be:
bogoutil --db-verify .bogofilter/wordlist.db
> >
> > Where does it say to use that command? Shouldn't it be
> >
> > db_verify .bogofilter/wordlist.db
--
Best,
Thomas
___
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list@gnome.org
To change
>
> > bogofilter -t message.file
> >
> > this will print 'Y' if it's spam, 'N' if it's not and 'U' if it's
> > unsure. There are other command line options, do 'man bogofilter' to
> > find them. It's not difficult finding out this information.
> That´s approximately what I was searching for,
On Sun, 2011-11-27 at 14:51 +0100, Thomas Prost wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 27.11.2011, 09:11 -0430 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan:
> > By default it won't filter anything, as I think you now realize. It
> > doesn't come with a default set of spam criteria, since one person's
> > spam may be another pers
On Sat, 2011-11-26 at 19:59 -0500, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-11-26 at 19:10 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > However your problem seems to be the reverse, i.e. you're getting spam
> > in your inbox. In that case, it's a strong indicator that the filter has
> > not learned enough to
Am Sonntag, den 27.11.2011, 09:11 -0430 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan:
> By default it won't filter anything, as I think you now realize. It
> doesn't come with a default set of spam criteria, since one person's
> spam may be another person's ham. That's why you have to get it to learn
> what *you* c
On Sun, 2011-11-27 at 14:19 +0100, Thomas Prost wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 27.11.2011, 13:00 + schrieb Pete Biggs:
> > However, a spam filter needs to learn good mail as well as bad - only 6
> > good messages learnt means it still won't start filtering. You need
> > about 100 of both types.
> T
Am Sonntag, den 27.11.2011, 13:10 + schrieb Pete Biggs:
> Well it's fairly obvious? You've been going on for ages about it not
> filtering your messages, therefore I thought it was fairly safe to
> assume that, err, it wasn't working as intended.
You´re definitely right - if my intention on usi
Am Sonntag, den 27.11.2011, 13:00 + schrieb Pete Biggs:
> bogoutil -d .bogofilter/wordlist.db |wc -l
..sorry for that, the output is now 38693 - but what doews that HELP ?
>
> > bogoutil -w .bogofilter/wordlist.db .MSG_COUNT
> > displays: 895 spam 6 good
> > SO WHAT ? Isn´t 895 mails enough
On Sun, 2011-11-27 at 13:49 +0100, Thomas Prost wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 27.11.2011, 11:09 + schrieb Pete Biggs:
> > Your spam isn't being filtered, therefore it's not working. The
> How were you able to see that ?
Well it's fairly obvious? You've been going on for ages about it not
filtering
> > I don't use bogofilter - I've never looked at it before this - but it is
> > clear from the bogofilter FAQ on the bogofilter site at
> >
> > http://bogofilter.sourceforge.net/faq.shtml
> >
> > that it is relatively easy to use bogoutil to report the state of the
> > database in terms of h
Am Sonntag, den 27.11.2011, 13:30 +0100 schrieb Thomas Prost:
> If the server has been setup to do spam detection, why on earth did
> you
> > disable it?
> ... because I want to control here by myself, what is spam and what
> not ;-)
This is hybris: As a single person, you cannot judge what spam
Am Sonntag, den 27.11.2011, 11:09 + schrieb Pete Biggs:
> Your spam isn't being filtered, therefore it's not working. The
How were you able to see that ?
> discussion is what part of the junk filtering is failing - and there are
,,, that´s my question
> two parts to that question: what, specif
Am Sonntag, den 27.11.2011, 11:04 + schrieb Pete Biggs:
> > I configured the server, not to do so - why else would I want local spam
> > detection ???
>
> If the server has been setup to do spam detection, why on earth did you
> disable it?
... because I want to control here by myself, what is
> > >
> > > I see... Which bits are missing?
> >
> > For one thing, the new FAQ says nothing about how to train the junk
> > filters. The old FAQ at least mentioned this as something you need to
> > do.
> Don´t they both/all say, that newest versions of bogofilter mustn´t to be
> trained as was
On Sun, 2011-11-27 at 11:54 +0100, Thomas Prost wrote:
> > Please provide sources for these statements, as I have no idea what you
> > refer to and who states what. Thanks in advance.
> I´ve read that much about it the last few days, that I´m having it up to
> the eyeballs, so I don´t remember thos
> >
> > So you're asking for a "My junk mail filtering is not working" help
> > page? That's doable.
> If I knew it wasn´t working, I would have asked so.
Your spam isn't being filtered, therefore it's not working. The
discussion is what part of the junk filtering is failing - and there are
two
> I configured the server, not to do so - why else would I want local spam
> detection ???
If the server has been setup to do spam detection, why on earth did you
disable it?
> As mentioned before, I don´t need an initialized filter.
You *need* to train it - it's how it works - although I see
> Please provide sources for these statements, as I have no idea what you
> refer to and who states what. Thanks in advance.
I´ve read that much about it the last few days, that I´m having it up to
the eyeballs, so I don´t remember those in detail - sorry ...
Maybe this one: http://wiki.ubuntuuser
Am Sonntag, den 27.11.2011, 00:54 +0100 schrieb Andre Klapper:
> On Sat, 2011-11-26 at 23:25 +0100, Thomas Prost wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, den 23.11.2011, 16:52 +0100 schrieb Andre Klapper:
> > > On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 10:47 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 15:00 +0100,
Am Samstag, den 26.11.2011, 19:10 -0430 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan:
> Getting back to the question: under Preferences->Mail Preferences->Junk
> there's a drop-down menu to select which spam filter is the default. It
> also checks that the appropriate binary is installed. It's my
> understanding t
Am Samstag, den 26.11.2011, 19:20 -0430 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan:
> >
> > I see... Which bits are missing?
>
> For one thing, the new FAQ says nothing about how to train the junk
> filters. The old FAQ at least mentioned this as something you need to
> do.
Don´t they both/all say, that newest
28 matches
Mail list logo
