If you look at a bug in bugzilla, in the header info at the top of the ticket,
there's a link that says "Create an attachment". Click that, then follow the
directions.
C
Olivier Nicole wrote:
ON> >Olivier, could you attach the new file to a bugzilla ticket? It's hard to
ON> >extract from your
>Olivier, could you attach the new file to a bugzilla ticket? It's hard to
>extract from your original email.
That's what I though, how to *attach* anything in bugzilla? I see
nowhere mention of such attachement.
I understood that it was not supposed to be dumped in the
"Description:" textarea,
This is based in part on Bryan Fullerton's patch, but also fixes another
part of the code where large messages (naturally, the most likely ones
to be a problem for people going over quota) could bounce instead of
being deferred.
I also parameterized the TEMPFAIL exit code just in case, and did th
This isn't a permanent answer, but you can do:
perl -n -e 'if(/\b([a-Z]{3,}\b).*\1/) { print "$1 repeated: $_"; }' < message
It would be neat to have the SA report give line numbers next to the rule
descriptions. I like bug #384
C
Duncan Findlay wrote:
DF> On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 05:05:45PM
On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 05:05:45PM -0700, Harry Putnam wrote:
> Using body based rules like this one posted here a few days ago:
> (It had a different name, which I've lost but the regex is the same)
>
> body Repeat_Any_Allcap /\b([A-Z]{3,})\b.*?\1/
>
I just filed 384 with this problem.
--
Using body based rules like this one posted here a few days ago:
(It had a different name, which I've lost but the regex is the same)
body Repeat_Any_Allcap /\b([A-Z]{3,})\b.*?\1/
My understaning was that it would notice the repeating of any string
of allcaps containing 3 or more chars, that
John Horne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2002-05-31 at 23:13, Harry Putnam wrote:
>> John Horne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Your observation got me closely checking my home made rules and
>> edits. I checked by commenting them all then, uncommenting one by
>> one. I found that this r
Time for a feature request:
This isn't a biggie, but I'd like to be able to give SA an initial value where
to start the score counting; a simple way to "merge" different spamcatchers or
adding personal rules via procmail, by checking each e-mail with a base score
from the other [whatever]s.
On Fri, 2002-05-31 at 23:13, Harry Putnam wrote:
> John Horne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Your observation got me closely checking my home made rules and
> edits. I checked by commenting them all then, uncommenting one by
> one. I found that this rule seems to be the culprit:
>header FW_LO
I'm guessing the original author actually wants to blacklist the word fuck, but
is too timid to actually type that to a mailing list of people (s)he doesn't
know.
C
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
AK> > I want to score FSCK more highly, and flag it as spam if it appears in
AK> > the subject line. Can
I am still using SA 2.01. There was much talk here about version 2.2+ using
excessive CPU loads. Have those problems been fixed by now?
I really am thinking of upgrading, as I want the SQL interface.
Thanks.
- Mark
System Administrator Asarian-host.org
---
"If you were supposed to und
On Sat, 01 Jun 2002, Sweethome.co.il Webmaster wrote:
> I installed successfully SA with amavisd through the spamproxy module.
> I understand that this is a new script and is not quite stable, so my
> question is: Can I setup SA without the spamproxy and be on the safe
> side in terms of stabilit
> I want to score FSCK more highly, and flag it as spam if it appears in
> the subject line. Can someone point me to the section in the docs that
> addresses this? I can't figure it out.
How to score it has already been answered, but I'm curious: Is the word "fsck"
even used outside the tech c
> That's a problem with your local copy. You obviously modified the file
> then did a cvs update. The CVS had an updated version of the file in
> that section. Choose either the CVS version (the bottom one) or your
> version (the top one) to keep.
Whoops, my fault. I deleted TextCat.pm and did a
The global whitelist contains stuff like
whitelist_from *@amazon.com
whitelist_from *@*.amazon.com
Is it possible to override these whitelists in
~/.spamassassin/user_prefs without blacklisting it? I just want some
global whitelistings ignored.
Another thing - I'm still pretty new to SA and i
Matt Thoene wrote:
MT> Saturday, June 1, 2002, 9:21:37 PM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
MT> > header FAKE_IP_RCVD Received =~
/\[0|(?:\d{1,3}\.){0,3}(?:2(?:5[6-9]|[6-9]\d)|[3-9]\d\d)[.\d]*\]/
MT> > describe FAKE_IP_RCVD Received via an impossible IP address
MT> Shouldn't there be a score line in
Daniel,
look in the wordfreqs/ directory of the distribution.
C
Daniel Quinlan wrote:
DQ> Craig R Hughes writes:
DQ>
DQ> > Better than a straight dictionary of single words is a dictionary of
DQ> > phrases, weighted by their frequency in spam vs nonspam. Hmm, wait,
DQ> > that sounds familiar
On Saturday, June 1, 2002, at 08:38 PM, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 01, 2002 at 09:10:24PM -0400, Patrice Fournier wrote:
>> Would any of you have a rule to catch fake IPs in received: header lines?
>> Something to catch received lines like the followings:
>
> I catch the bad IPs in procm
It *is* in the documentation -- at least was just now when I read the
Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf manpage -- but then I'm behind on my email, so it might
not have been there when you wrote this. ok_locales seems to be one of the
better documented config options!
C
Michael Moncur wrote:
MM> Daniel
Mailing-List: gives a false-positive for me on the google-friend mailing list,
The ant developers list (apache/jakarta), and a couple others. Looks like ezmlm
inserts it, since many of the lines say "run by exmlm" at the end.
I get a lot of X-EM-Version and X-EM-Registration as well, looks like
I wonder how the ok_languages stuff would deal with that footer!
C
Jason Baker wrote:
JB> This one got by with a 4.8/5... mostly in Korean, except for the footer. The
JB> footer was worth having to read it though. :)
JB>
JB> > If you could't understand this language, please click the rejection
Thanks for finding this bug Pete. I've just checked in the fix, which is that
where it's still got auto_whitelist_threshold, it should have _factor
C
Pete Hanson wrote:
PH> I've been looking at the auto-whitelist code trying to figure out if it is
suitable for our environment, and it looks to
Patches to mass-check which do this threading stuff (remember perl threads are
uber-flakey) will be happily accepted (provided that they work!).
C
Daniel Quinlan wrote:
DQ> If the non-local network tests take too long, how about running all of
DQ> them first in a separate thread, then do the lo
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
AK> I received a spam with a forged From: coming from a good email address at my
AK> company today. Headers below for anyone interested.
AK> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My advice: Fire A.J.
C
___
Don't miss th
Add the following lines to the bottom of /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf:
header FSCK_PENALTY Subject =~ /FSCK/i
describe FSCK_PENALTYSubject contains "FSCK"
score FSCK_PENALTY 3.0
The "i" on the end of the first line makes the search case-insensitive (ie will
match FS
Probably you ran "make test" or installed from CPAN which does that for you.
You can safely ignore/delete the file.
C
Brian May wrote:
BM> How would an auto white list db file get created if my only command line to
BM> spamd is -d and spamc has no arguments? I'm kinda stumped on this one...
B
This has come up before a few times (not quite an FAQ though). The concensus at
the end of the discussion ends up being that deciding whether or not to process
mail through SA is best handled upstream of SA -- why invoke SA at all if you
don't want to invoke it? The way you handle the should-SA-
27 matches
Mail list logo
